ELECTRICITY IS NOT A
FORM OF ENERGY
(c)1999
William
J. BeatyMany encyclopedias, dictionaries, and textbooks
contain very clear statements about the nature of
Electricity. They say this:
- Electricity is a type of energy.
- Electric current is a flow of energy.
The above statements are wrong. Yes, electrical energy
does exist. However, this energy cannot be called
"Electricity," since charges of electricity are very
different from quantities of electrical energy. They're
two different things, so the energy and the charge
cannot both be the electricity. It's not too
difficult to demonstrate the difficulty. Below is a
collection of simple facts which show that charges of
Electricity, the stuff that flows within copper
wires, are not a form of energy.
- In a simple electric circuit, the electricity
flows slowly in a complete circle, while the
energy moves differently. The electrical energy
flows rapidly one way, going from the source to the
load. The energy does not follow the circular flow
of electricity; electricity and electrical energy
are two different things. No charges of electricity
are gained or lost as the charges circulate within
the wires, yet batteries create electrical energy
from chemical energy, and light bulbs destroy[1]
the electrical energy as they convert it into light.
Electrical energy takes a one-way path from battery
to bulb. Electric charge flows around (and around
and around) a closed-loop path.
- In a lightbulb, charges of electricity flow
through the filament and back out again. None
are lost. This electricity enters the light bulb
through one wire, and the same amount of
electricity leaves through the other wire. Yet the
electrical energy doesn't act like this. The light
bulb uses up the electric energy: the electrical
energy flows into the bulb and is transformed into
heat and light. The electrical energy does not come
back out through the second wire and return to the
battery.
- In an AC system, the charges of electricity move
back and forth over a short distance. In other
words, they sit inside the wires and vibrate. That's
what AC or Alternating Current is all about. The
electricity does not move forward at all (if
it did, that would be a direct current or "DC.") Yet
as the charges of electricity are wiggling back and
forth, the electrical energy moves forward rapidly.
Only the electricity "alternates." The electrical
energy does not; the energy flows continuously
forwards as waves. (If this is confusing, think of
sound which moves through the air. Electricity is
like the air which is vibrating. On the other hand,
the electrical energy is like the sound waves which
fly through the air.) Just as sound and air are two
different things, electrical energy and electricity
are two different things.
Before I go too far with this, I must admit that I
am playing a small trick with words. In the above
statements, I am using the word "electricity" in the way
scientists have used it since Electricity was first
investigated. I am using the word "electricity" to name
the stuff that flows inside the wires; where a quantity
of electrons is a quantity of electricity, and where a
flow of electricity is called "an electric current."
Why is this a trick? It's a trick because most people
use the word "electricity"
in a totally different way. They begin by defining the
word "electricity" to mean electrical energy! Electric
companies do this (think of kilowatt-hours of
electricity.) So do the science textbooks written for
grades
K-6. So do many dictionaries and encyclopedias. This
causes endless confusion. Physicists try to tell us that
electric charges are not energy, and that a flow of
charges is not a flow of energy. What then is an
electric current? under the definition of "electricity"
used by all these books, an electric current IS NOT a
flow of electricity! Huh? You SHOULD be confused.
There's something wrong here.
Note: my above statements about electricity and
energy would be accepted by most scientists throughout
history, including Ben Franklin,
Michael Faraday,
James
C. Maxwell and Robert Millikan. I'm using the word
electricity in the same manner as they did:
electricity is the positive and negative "stuff" that's
found in all electrons and protons. It is the
"substance" that flows along inside of the wires. When
it flows, these scientists would call it a "current of
electricity." They'd say that any charged object has a
"charge of electricity," and that electrons and protons
are "particles of electricity."
Without realizing it, the electric companies and the
K-6 science textbooks are trying to re-define the
original meaning of the word electricity. How can
such a thing happen? I'll examine that after more of
these statements about "electricity."
MORE TRUE STATEMENTS ABOUT "ELECTRICITY"
- In a DC circuit, the electricity within the
wires flows
exceedingly slowly; at speeds around inches per
minute. At the same time, the electrical energy
flows at nearly the speed of light.
- If we know the precise amount of electricity
flowing per second through a wire (the Amperes,)
this tells us nothing about the amount of energy
being delivered per second into a light bulb (the
Watts.) Amperes are not Watts, an electric current
is not a flow of energy; they are two different
things.
- In an electric circuit, the flow of the
electricity is measured in Coulombs per second
(Amperes.) The flow of energy is measured in
Joules per second (Watts.) A Coulomb is not a Joule,
and there is no way to convert from Coulombs of
charge into Joules of energy, or from Amperes to
Watts. A quantity of electricity is not a quantity
of energy.
- Electrical energy is electromagnetism; it is
composed of an electromagnetic field. On the other
hand, the particles of electricity (electrons)
flowing within a wire have little resemblance to an
electromagnetic field. They are matter. Electricity
is not energy, instead it is a major component of
everyday matter.
- In an electric circuit containing coils, if we
reverse the polarity of voltage while the direction
of the flowing electricity
remains the same, then the direction of the
flowing energy will be reversed. Current
same; energy flow reversed? Yes. A flow of energy
does not follow the direction of the flowing
electricity. You can know everything about the
direction of the electricity within a wire, but this
tells you nothing about the direction of the flowing
electrical energy.
- In any electric circuit, the smallest particle
of electrical energy is NOT the electron. The
smallest particle of energy is the "unit quantum" of
electromagnetic energy: it is the photon. Electrons
are not particles of EM energy, neither do they
carry the energy as they travel in the circuit.
Electricity is 'made' of electrons, while electrical
energy is electromagnetism and is 'made' of
photons.
- In the electric power grid, a certain amount of
energy is lost because it flys off into space. This
is well understood: electrical energy is
electromagnetic waves travelling in the air, and
unless the power lines are twisted or somehow
shielded, they will act as 60Hz antennas. Waves of
60Hz electrical energy can spread outwards into
space rather than following the wires. The power
lines can even receive extra 60Hz energy from space,
from magnetic storms in Earth's magnetosphere.
Electric energy is gained and lost to empty space
while the charges of electricity just sit inside the
wires and wiggle. Energy is not electricity.
- In an electric circuit, electrical energy does
not flow inside the copper. Instead it flows in the
empty air surrounding the wires. This fact is hidden
because we calculate energy flow by multiplying
voltage times current. College-level physics books
describe a less misleading method of measuring this
energy flow: take the vector cross-product of the E
and M components of the electromagnetic field at all
points in a plane penetrated by the wires. We call
this the Poynting Vector field. Add these
measurements together, and this tells us the total
energy flow (the Joules of energy that flow each
second through the plane.) In other words, in order
to discover the rate of energy flow, don't look at
the flowing electrons. The electricity flow tells us
little. Instead look at the electromagnetic fields
which surround the wires.
How can dictionaries, encyclopedias, and textbooks
make such a gigantic error about electricity? I'm not
certain, but I suspect that the mistake was missed
because it slowly crept into the books over many
decades. Most people practice learning rather than
unlearning. Since they accumulate knowledge rather than
busting misconceptions, they never stumbled across the
problem. Since most people don't really understand
electrical physics, nobody complained, or even noticed.
And if you raise the temperature of the lobster pot
slowly enough, the lobsters won't realize that they're
in trouble! (grin)
What about the experts? Why don't the science experts complain? One
reason is that modern scientists used the term
"electricity" less and less over the years. Perhaps
they're aware of the creeping distortion of the word
"electricity", and so they avoid using it. Instead they
adopted some improved terminology. Scientists of today
don't say "charges of electricity" anymore. Instead they
call it "electric charge." Also, modern scientists no
longer say that electric current is "a flow of
electricity." Instead they call it "a flow of charge."
They also say that electrons are "charge carriers"
rather than "particles of electricity." Even Faraday's
Law has been changed, and today scientists usually speak
of "quantities of charge" rather than the
"quantities of electricity" discussed in the
traditional definition of the Electrolysis Law.
If today's scientists notice their textbooks stating
that "electricity is energy", they will not necessarily
realize that this is an error. They will not realize
that "electricity is energy" means the same as this
erroneous statment: "electric charge is a type of
energy." Scientists no longer use word "electricity" in
their day-to-day science profession, they mostly use it
when explaining physics to children. As a result, they
don't rigorously police their own usage of the word
"electricity" in uncritical situations, and don't notice
when children's textbooks get it wrong.
Also, contemporary scientists are in the same
position as everyone else: they learned some of their
terminology in elementary school, and if their books
were wrong, their minds might still retain those errors.
If every one of us learns in grade school that charges
of "electricity" are a form of energy, we may remain
blind to the contradictions even when we grow up to
become scientists. The scientists put the mistakes in a
mental pigeonhole and never use them during work, but
still may bring them out when explaining electricity to
non-experts. I caught myself doing this at the start,
and I doubt I'm the only one with this problem.
Another reason why the error was never fixed: if an
error becomes extremely widespread, and hundreds of
thousands of people begin making the same mistake, then
the error will become invisible. Those people will
refuse to even acknowledge the error as being an
error. After all, so many people cannot be wrong! Oh
yeah? The majority rules? Not where the real world is
concerned! It doesn't matter how many people make a
factual error: the error remains just as wrong. However,
any experts who object, and who try to fix the massive
error, they will perhaps be seen as
grammar-nitpickers living in ivory towers. The ones
who have the ambition to point out the error are easily
ignored because they are so few.
It doesn't work that way in non-science topics. In
other topics, majority does rule, and the "grammar
nitpickers" are actually wrong. For example, if millions
of people use slang words in their daily speech, then
eventually those slang words will become acceptable. As
the slang is used over many years, dictionaries
eventually include those words (dictionaries RECORD
definitions, they don't promote them, and the common
mistakes are recorded too.) Eventually all the
dictionaries will include the slang words, and those
words will become proper English and will be slang no
longer. People usually ignore Grammarians who object to
the "misuse" or "corruption" of the English language.
But Science classes are different than English
classes. In Science, reality rules, and if a large group
of non-scientists tries to change the description of the
real world, then that group falls into error. It doesn't
matter how many people "vote" for the change, because
Nature isn't listening. If "electricity" originally
means electric charge, and if people try to change
things so that the word "electricity" now means energy,
then we have a special word for their actions: MISTAKEN
TERMINOLOGY.
I don't quite know how to solve the problem regarding
the word "electricity." Too many reference books contain
the errors. The word has been misused for so many
decades that I am tempted to follow the lead of the
scientists: just give up! Just admit that the word
Electricity is irretrievably contaminated, and
simply abandon it. Yet silently doing this has caused
serious problems problems in the past. It doesn't fix
the problem, it just covers it up.
Abandoning the word electricity might defend
Science against the brain-damage caused by contradictory
terminology, but it does nothing to fix all of the
reference books which are filled with confusing
explanations of "electricity." More importantly, if we
quietly abandon the word "electricity" without
discussion, this will do nothing to help all of the poor
souls who are currently confused by the incorrect
"electricity" concepts. Neither will it give any aid to
all of the poor science students who are butting their
heads against the
contradictory material still present in their science
textbooks. |