Could someone explain charge to me?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Azrioch
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Charge Explain
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of electric charge, exploring its nature, sources, and implications in various contexts such as electrostatics, lightning, and everyday phenomena. Participants seek to clarify their understanding of charge in both theoretical and practical applications.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Marc expresses confusion about the nature of charge, questioning whether it relates to ions or electrons and how rubbing materials can lead to charge transfer.
  • One participant explains that in different contexts, charge can refer to electrons, ions, or even quarks, depending on the medium (e.g., plasmas, electrolytes, conductors).
  • Marc seeks clarification on charge separation in lightning, suggesting it may involve dipole interactions in water molecules and questioning the source of charge during everyday activities like removing a sweater.
  • Another participant mentions that charge can disappear over time due to interactions with the environment, though specifics are not detailed.
  • One participant proposes that charge is a fundamental quantity akin to mass, which cannot be fully described, while another asserts this as a certainty.
  • Discussion includes the quark model and string theory as frameworks that attempt to explain charge, though limitations in understanding remain acknowledged.
  • Participants discuss the Law of Conservation of Electric Charge, emphasizing that charging one object results in an equal and opposite charge elsewhere.
  • Questions arise about whether charge is quantized, with some participants affirming that it is, based on the idea that charge exists in discrete amounts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the nature of charge, its sources, and its quantization. While some points are clarified, there is no consensus on the fundamental nature of charge or its complete explanation.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge that the understanding of charge varies significantly across different contexts, and there are unresolved questions regarding the mechanisms behind charge generation and dissipation.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and enthusiasts of physics and chemistry, particularly those exploring electrostatics, charge interactions, and related phenomena in everyday life.

Azrioch
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
What exactly is charge?

I am currently in both Physics 12 and Chemistry 12 and we just started Electrostatics today and I got very confused.

Sure, I could just accept it for being and plug whatever I need to into the equation to get my answer but I'd prefer to know exactly what's happening.

I thought that perhaps they are ions in the chemical sense or are they perhaps electrons and if so how are they being removed from the valance shells by just rubbing?

I'm a little confused... could someone help me with an explanation?

Thank you,

Marc
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The answer depends on the context. In hot plasmas, charged particles are electrons and positive ions. If the plasma is hot enough, most of the nuclei are entirely stripped of their electrons.

As you point out, in an electrolyte solution, charges are ions, being atoms or molecules containing an excess or a deficit of electrons.

In a copper wire, the charges of importance are valence electrons, I believe.

In a semiconductor, there are electrons in conducting bands, and when an electron is kicked from a filled band to an empty band, a hole is left behind in the previously filled band. The hole can act as a positive charge; there is an interesting discussion on this in another thread.

In a charged capacitor, one plate has an excess of electrons, while the other plate has a deficit of electrons.

Inside of baryons and mesons there are quarks, which have a charge magnitude of 1/3 or 2/3 the magnitude of the electron charge. For reasons having to do with the nature of the force binding quarks together, you never come across bare quarks under ordinary circumstances.

I hope this wasn't entirely stuff you already knew.
 
Well, no, I didn't know the majority of that.

Let me give you a context then. For instance, a bolt of lightening, what causes the charge separation in the clouds? It is perhaps because of the dipole interactions between the water molecules that push the negative ones to the bottom to the point that ... well.. *shrugs* I don't know exactly what lightning is.

I'm aware that it changes based on situation. Sorry I didn't make it clear... I am thinking more of common everyday charge. For instance, when I take a sweater off... what causes that charge? Where does it come from? The rubbing of the material... but what creates that charge? Does it come from something in the air? Is it stripping atoms in the air of their electrons that creates the small spark that we see?

We were analyzing the whole "Induction, contact, and friction" charging and I was confused as to what the charge was doing on the ball or rod in the first place?

Also, what causes the charge on a charged object to disappear with time? Is it just a variety of interactions with the air? Filling of valence shells or... that's the only one I can really think of...

Thanks for the quick response!

*confused*
 
Here is a link on van de Graaf generators that may help:

http://www.amasci.com/emotor/vdg.html

I have read that the generation of lightning in thunderstorms is along the same lines as the way it is done by a van de Graaf generator. Whether that is a sloppy or a realistic thing to say, I'm not sure.

I have also heard that dust in the air is important in causing lightning. However, Jupiter has lightning storms, and since it does not have a solid surface (at least not anywhere close to the cloud tops that our spacecraft can photograph with their cameras) with the clay needed as a source for dust, I suspect raindrops (which Jupiter does have) are critical to lightning generation.
 
may be charge is just like mass a fundamental quantity that cannot be described
 
garytse86 said:
may be charge is just like mass a fundamental quantity that cannot be described
NOt, "may be," but "is."

Janitor's comments are all fine; thi sis just my 2 cents (did anyone else notice that the "cent" symbol is gone?)

THere is the quark model of sub-atomic particles which is very accurate at predicting the charge and mass (and other fundamental properties) of the many hundred "fundamental particles." BUt this model does not explain what "charge" is.

THe latest conjectures, such as string theory (which is not a true "theory" because it can't be tested) delve into what "charge" and "mass" actually are. until we know what is underneath, we have to accept that there is a base-layer of "what is." Currently that base begins with these fundamental properties.

Charge, therefore, is a quality of matter that causes certain effects (that's what you're learning now). There is lots of evidence that shows that no particle can have a total charge that is not a full-integer multiple of the fundamental charge (the charge of one electron or proton).

[No, the quark is not a "particle" because no single quark can exist on its own; but yes, some quarks carry fractions of the fundamental charge. That debate is over sematics.]

Charge comes in two "flavors" that where dubbed "positive" and "negative" by Ben Franklin; although they show "opposite" natures, there is nothing intrisically positive nor negative about charge.

THe Law of Conservation of Electric Charge is one of the strongest laws of physics. Basically it says that no charge can be created or destroyed, ever. So when you "charge" something, you are by law, also chrging something else equally and oppositely. Scuff your feet on the carpet, and you get charged negatively by stealing some electrons from the carpet. This means that the carpet has been positively charged since it now is missing some electrons.

Oh, I could go on...
 
Since the topic of lightning came up.

I remember as a kid looking at a book about a volcano called Paricutin, in Mexico. It started as a crack that opened up in a farmer's field in 1943. It got to be fairly big, erupting on and off over the course of a decade. Nobody was killed by ashfall or lava flow, but three people were killed by lightning generated by the plume of ash rising into the sky. It seems that small solid or liquid grains/drops moving through air lead to a charge buildup. I have sometimes gotten quite a shock from handling a vacuum cleaner hose while suctioning up dust from the garage floor.

http://volcano.und.nodak.edu/vwdocs/volc_images/img_paricutin.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
is charge quantised?
 
garytse86 said:
is charge quantised?
Yes.

It is a well-supported theory that no PARTICLE can have an electric charge that is not a full integer multiple of the fundamental charge (1.60217646263 x 10^-19 Coulombs).

The theorized charge of individual "quarks" will be 1/3 or 2/3 of this amount, but since individulal quarks do not exist on their own, then the previous paragraph is so far still valid.

This is essentially what is meant by "quanta." Specific, "discreet" packages of a certain quantity.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
7K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K