The Electrical Contractor Network

ECN Electrical Forum
Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals

Books, Tools and Test Equipment for Electrical and Construction Trades

Register Now!

Register Now!

We want your input!

Featured:
   

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

   
Recent Posts
Industrail Control Panel bonding per 409.108
by sparkyinak
Today at 03:17 PM
Calling all Non-US members!! (Non-US only)
by aussie240
Yesterday at 02:39 AM
Photo Upload Tutorial
by DanK
12/06/16 11:35 PM
Sprinklered equipment 26-008
by bigpapa
12/02/16 04:24 PM
On Delay Relay with Auto Reset
by Potseal
12/01/16 09:59 AM
New in the Gallery:
12.5A through 0.75mm˛ flex (just out of curiosity)
Shout Box

Top Posters (30 Days)
gfretwell 13
HotLine1 9
sparkyinak 8
Texas_Ranger 8
Trumpy 6
Who's Online
0 registered (), 248 Guests and 6 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#127013 - 03/27/01 06:28 PM Energy?
Steve T Offline
Member

Registered: 02/14/01
Posts: 312
Loc: Oak Park, IL, USA
Scott,

I have a hard time understanding....energy I guess. Could you define energy? Is there a fixed amount of energy in the universe that can't be created or destroyed, that just changes form?

I ask these questions in regards to heat. In studying chemical reactions in basic college chemistry classes I clearly understood most of the reactions except when heat was involved. It's been a while but I seem to recall when a reaction took place that created heat, the atoms didn't equal out in the reaction. Is this correct or not?

Lets start from here and I'll expand as some of these questions are clear.

Top
#127014 - 03/28/01 02:35 PM Re: Energy?
sparky Offline
Member

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 5545
sort of a braod Q here Steve, but that's ok, as long as you don't mind going off on a few tangents

we did have a thread including electron flow, energy transformed into heat. Scott wrote well on the topic, much physics, great for contemplation when doing those boring "fix a light" no-brainer jobs.

so , can you give us an example here to work from?


Top
#127015 - 03/29/01 05:38 PM Re: Energy?
Steve T Offline
Member

Registered: 02/14/01
Posts: 312
Loc: Oak Park, IL, USA
I am thinking more on a universal scale than electrical to get a better understanding of electricity. Let me ask this question--If all the suns and stars burned out and no more light was created would the energy that was light be some other form of energy or would that energy disappear? In short, will everything in the universe "balance out" so there is no transfer of energy?

Not looking to get into philosophical discussion just trying to understand energy.

Top
#127016 - 03/29/01 10:25 PM Re: Energy?
Scott35 Offline

Broom Pusher and
Member

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 2724
Loc: Anaheim, CA. USA
Oh no! You are touching on one of my all-time favorite things to babble about

This is where my Wife just leaves the room

As much as I would love to fill up this message with 100,000 words, I'll just put in a few thoughts.

Also, I'll make up a small word document on transformers to post to the Xfmrs thread in this area. This will be in suppliment to the current flow message [holy cow, Batman!!].

Well, first off - you have a great idea to look at the overall picture for a complete [or should I say Complex??] look at energy.

The look at energy in the universe covers a broad area and _IS_ the underlying consept.

If we look at a Neutron Star [a "Pulsar"], we see the left over core of a star that has undergone a Supernova - either from some event leading to it collapsing on it's self, or from falling through a black hole.

After the nova event has ended, there's a leftover ball of matter that was once the star's inner core.
Prior to the event, the core was huge! we will say it was 900,000 KM diameter.
After the event, the core is now only 200 KM diameter!!
The core still weighs the same as it did before, which means that a spoonfull of it's matter could weigh more than 1,000,000 Kilograms!!
This is the result of almost all energy being released from the star - "blown out" over the vacuum of space. The extremely little bit of energy left over results in the rotating leftover core emmiting some type of light [Electro-Magnetic Radiation]. This is ejected out at the poles of the core. when the core rotates, it appears like a lighthouse's rotating light would look.

The reason for the unimaginable weights of a relatively small amount of matter is due to the loss of energy levels in the Atomic structures them selves.

A good explaination would be that the Electron shells have become extremely close to the kernal, which results in many more atoms occupying the same physical area.

Let's say that the first shell was a distance of 1,000 KM [3,000,000 feet] from the kernal, before the event.
After the event, this first shell has become a distance of 10 Meters [30 feet] away from the kernal [neucleus].

The loss of energy [heat and others] and gravity [gravitrons and anti-gravitrons], is the reason for this happening.
Under this condition, there are billions more atoms in the same physical area, which results in an increased mass [weight].

The energy given off from the Supernova event, results in both Kinetic Energy [heat, EMR, other moving subatomic stuff], and Potential Energy [the matter it's self - the star's gases, solids, liquids, etc.] thrown out to space.

This area is SOOOOOO extreme and deep, that it should not be discussed too much in this forum!!
If we do discuss it, we should keep the levels to something basic and simple - otherwise things will easilly become so extreme, messages will be too long to read!

Astrophysics sure can bring up a lot of questions to "normal" thinking - really questions the way we all were taught in School!
One begins to contiplate if stars really do die of old age, or if they die from other reasons.
Also begin to see a new view of energy produced from stars, plus actual light it's self. The first one that got my major interest are Neutrinos!!! I used to think that Photons were really interesting prior to this!!
[they still are , just not the most interesting now]

Let me know if this touches base to your questions.

Scott SET
_________________________
Scott " 35 " Thompson
Just Say NO To Green Eggs And Ham!

Top
#127017 - 03/29/01 11:05 PM Re: Energy?
Scott35 Offline

Broom Pusher and
Member

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 2724
Loc: Anaheim, CA. USA
I didn't cover the first question yet

As you know, the Chemical reactions will result in both an energy released and the creation of a new Molecule, due to "Bonding" of individual elements [primarily Atoms, but can include both Atoms and Molecules].

The reactions that produce heat energy as a byproduct of bonding two elements at high differences of energy levels, would be Exothermic, whereas, ones that require heat energy to bond two elements of near similar energy levels would be Indothermic.
[as much as I remember also!! ].

Simple REDOX reactions would create a new Molecule from elements bonding to each other through [possibly] covaliant bonds.
Iron [Fe] would be oxidized [reducing another element], by some element that's lower in energy. The end result is a new molecule, which contains an electron [or more] from the reduced element, bonded onto the Iron element.
At the point of bonding, there's an energy transfered outwards in the form of EMR [Electro Magnetic Radiation]. It's usually Heat energy, but could be any form and combination.
The end results of any reactions in this realm [leaving Atomic / Nuclear reactions out], will end up with almost everything equaling in weight at the end, as they were before.
The extremely small lossed weight is the released energy.

In a reaction that requires some form of energy introduced to the elements - in order to get them to bond and form a new molecule - would also release some energy after the fact.
A great example of this would be filling a balloon with Hydrogen gas, let it float up to the ceiling in the lab, then "Light it" on fire by placing a burning piece of material under the balloon. I use this example as it's the first one in School that grabbed my attention and made 100% sense!!

The hydrogen filled balloon is surrounded by the gases in the air. some Oxygen atoms exist in the air [along with a bunch of other stuff]. The Hydrogen is pushed upward, since the Bouyant Forces involved cause it to rise above the heavier air gases.

Once the heat from the flaming paper towel on a stick has made a hole in the balloon, Hydrogen gas begins to escape.
This heat energy causes the Hydrogen to bond to the Oxygen elements in the air - so the end results are a large energy transfer [heat and sound] as the creation of a new Water Molecule is made.

If you took all the stuff prior to the reaction and weighed it, then took everything that resulted from the reaction and weighed it, there will be a tiny loss of mass - this is the released Kinetic Energy [The huge explosion flame, the heat in that explosion, and the sound produced by the explosion].

Nuke reactions have a much larger loss of mass at the end of the reactions, which is why they have such great energy outputs per size of materials used.

One single Fission reaction of a U92 element, the result of breaking a Uranium 235 atom into two [2] smaller plutonium atoms by blasting a high speed free electron through the kernal [nucleus], results in the creation of two [or more] new ELEMENTS [rather than Molecules], and a loss of overall mass - in the form of usable kinetic energies, plus another free electron which will fission another element.

When the 238 impurities in the Uranium fuel "Gobble Up" the flying free electron, they become Uranium 239 - this isotope is the highly radioactive leftover waste that any Uranium Fission reactor is left to deal with.
It's Half-Life is like 4.6 Billion Years before transition to a new element [radioactive decay involves sequential steps over time in changes to new elements until they become something stable].
The prediction is that these elements will decay until they end up being Lead [Pb].

Can you see that I am capable of blowing any reply out of proportions!

Hope this makes sense.

Scott SET
_________________________
Scott " 35 " Thompson
Just Say NO To Green Eggs And Ham!

Top
#127018 - 03/30/01 05:08 AM Re: Energy?
sparky Offline
Member

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 5545
Scott;

Ok, so some energy becomes heat, isn't something that changes energy form to form a "transducer"? i may have the term wrong here....so an incandesant light might be such an animal?
i think, i'm not sure, that in your 2nd thread, the REDOX paragraph is describing those "supersonic" rust inhibitors they sell for cars???
oh and, i gotta ask, what makes a nuetrino so interesting...??


Top
#127019 - 03/30/01 05:55 AM Re: Energy?
Scott35 Offline

Broom Pusher and
Member

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 2724
Loc: Anaheim, CA. USA
Bingo!! Give that man a Cigar!!

The term for a device that transforms - or "Changes" - energy from one form to another is a Transducer.

The Pickups on an Electric Guitar are Transducers, because they change the vibrating magnetic fluxes created by the strings, into corresponding levels of electricity [in AC form].

Speakers are Transducers, since they convert electrical energy [once again, AC], into corresponding sound energy.

An Incandescent lamp is a Transducer, since it converts any type of electric power into light energy [heat, white and UV light].


To answer the REDOX question:
If serious - the REDOX reactions are how things rust, plus what occurs with "Contact Potentials" that get created when dissimilar metals become contacted [like Aluminum and Steel, or Iron]. When we run across this in the field, it's when we have to wrap a section of Aluminum Flex that is, or may, become contacted to other metallic pipes - like copper water lines.
REDOX reactions are the principle operations of Electrochemical cells [batteries].

If Joking - That's probably the best answer


Now to Neutrinos:

They are so amazing to me because they defy some laws of physics!!
They penetrate dense matter without any loss of energy! They can, and do, blast right through planets - earth included - without losing any speed, nor losing energy levels.
They travel instantaniously, rather than over some related time. When they leave a star, they travel to some other receiving point at almost the same time - that point can exist light years away! And they do this even after going through a planet!
They exist in relatively straight line fashion, rather than in a Wave formation like Photons do.
Photons may bounce around inside a star for thousands and even millions of years before finally escaping - where Neutrinos escape instantly.
Finally, they travel so much faster than light it makes Photons look like Turtles!!

I am trying to figure out why they are needed in Nature! .

Scott SET
_________________________
Scott " 35 " Thompson
Just Say NO To Green Eggs And Ham!

Top
#127020 - 03/30/01 09:11 AM Re: Energy?
sparky66wv Offline
Member

Registered: 11/17/00
Posts: 2339
Loc: West Virginia
Scott...

Love your posts...

I've read Stephen Hawking's "A Brief History of Time", James Gleick's "Chaos", and "The Dancing Wu Li Masters" by Gary Zukav and David Finkelstein. But that's as far as my knowledge goes in this area. (I'm not saying that I understood any of it!)

My question is: just what is your occupation?

You're wasting some serious knowledge and talent if you're just a "sparky" like the rest of us mere mortals....

Just my humble opinion...

Please take this as a compliment...
_________________________
-Virgil
Residential/Commercial Inspector
5 Star Inspections
Member IAEI

Top
#127021 - 03/30/01 09:39 AM Re: Energy?
sparky Offline
Member

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 5545
Scott, no i was'nt kidding, JC Whitney had advertised that rust killer device...

i also thought light was the fastest thing around...are these neutrino's an item newly discovered...?

Virgil;
are all those books about this sort of thread?

caution-mere mortal evolving here....

Top
#127022 - 03/30/01 09:53 AM Re: Energy?
sparky66wv Offline
Member

Registered: 11/17/00
Posts: 2339
Loc: West Virginia
"The Dancing Wu LI Masters" by Gary Zukav and David Finkelstein, is the best reader for the layman. It compares physics to the Chinese word "WU LI" (meaning "physics" among many other things...) to Tibetan Monk beliefs, and really explains things in an understanding way.

"Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawking is more on Scott's level, I've read it three times and most of it is still over my head.

James Gleick's "Chaos" is a little different, dives into the Chaos sciences, it's history and it's implications... plus cool pictures. Tells of the "Butterfly Effect" which is proof that predicting the weather is doomed.
_________________________
-Virgil
Residential/Commercial Inspector
5 Star Inspections
Member IAEI

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >



ECN Electrical Forums - sponsored by Electrical Contractor Network - Electrical and Code Related Discussion for Electrical Contractors, Electricians, Inspectors, Instructors, Engineers and other related Professionals