[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: A Puzzle [ coulomb ]




From: 	bmack[SMTP:bmack-at-frontiernet-dot-net]
Sent: 	Tuesday, September 09, 1997 11:37 PM
To: 	Tesla List
Subject: 	Re: A Puzzle [ coulomb ]


> 
> 
> From: 	DamDeName-at-aol-dot-com[SMTP:DamDeName-at-aol-dot-com]
> Sent: 	Monday, September 08, 1997 7:16 AM
> To: 	tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: 	Re: A Puzzle [ coulomb ]
> 
> In a message dated 97-09-08 03:00:18 EDT, you write:
> 
> << 9/7/97
  
 I've got to say that This coulomb thread has got me wondering
what this is all about.

So far I agree that is a unit of standard measure much like the volt.
Any physics text will state that 1 electronic charge=1.602x10^--19 coulomb
and one ampere=1coulomb/sec, etc.
If this is not a physical constant, then our whole system of measure is
a moving target and meaningless!
Upon checking various reference books on hand, I find no mention
of a separate definition for the coulomb nor any caveat about its
suspected inaccuracy.

Futhermore, I'm not a PHD in physics, but to the best of my knowlege
Cavendish was best known for his gravity experiments-not electrostatic
measurement. The only connection between the two (as far as I know)
was the experimental method-namely the torsion balance.

Please enlighten me!

Jim M


>  snip
>  
>  >
>  
>  >
>  >snip
>  >
>  >!
> 
>  
>  No, Ed.  An ES coulomb is not the same as an EM coulomb.  In the mad 
>  rush to systemitize, unitize and find intercovertibility of all 
>  physical forces by turn of the century electricians, a very flawed 
>  experiment was devised to determine the coulombic relationships of EM 
>  and ES forces.  Briefly, EM force in Newtons between two parallel wires 
>  with a constant current flowing in them was compared to ES force in 
>  Newtons in the Cavendish experiments.  The results were announced to 
>  the world and of course this relationship became carved in stone.  It 
>  was a big mistake though because the experiment isn't capable of 
>  establishing this relationship.  The results are several orders of 
>  magnitude in error.  
>  
>  This is not particurally new news.  But maybe it is important news to 
>  some members of this list.  I suggest you and others who are interested 
>  consult the archives for posts on this subject about one year ago.  
>  Also see HVlist archives.
>  
>  RWW  
>  
>  
>  
>   >>
> Hi all---
> 
>            I'm a bit confused  here also -----
> Def. --- coulomb -- "handbook  of chem & phys "
> 
>    " A unit quantity of electricity . It is the quantity of electricity
>  which must pass 
> through a circuit to deposit 0.0011180 grams of silver from a solution of
> silver
> nitrate. An ampere is one coulomb per second. A coulomb is also the 
> quantity of electricity on the positive plate of a condenser of one
> farad capacity when the electromotive force is one volt ."
> 
> so ---- ummmmmm
> 
> regards,
>                  Sandy
> 
> 
>