Apology & Question: Understanding Charge Carriers in Metals

  • Thread starter Thread starter holly
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around understanding why electrons, rather than protons, serve as charge carriers in metals. The key points highlight that electrons are smaller and loosely bound, allowing them to move freely, while protons are confined within the nucleus and do not contribute to electrical conduction. The consensus is that the most relevant factor for charge mobility is the loose binding of electrons, rather than their size or negative charge. Participants clarify that while size may seem significant, it does not impact the conduction process. Ultimately, the answer to the question is determined to be "loosely bound."
holly
Messages
184
Reaction score
0
Apology First: :frown:
I very much regret having a nasty, hair-trigger temper and I apologize to anyone rightfully offended by it, and feel I should indeed read questions more thoroughly and also try to research questions better. Weak excuse: I find it very upsetting to care for dying Alzheimers patients and have very little time. It is a requirement of my program to care for the dying.

Question:
Charge carriers in a metal are electrons rather than protons because electrons are:
Smaller
Negative
Loosely bound
All of the above
None of the above

I know they are smaller (lighter) and also loosely bound. I am not sure the negative fact comes into play, because the book says protons carry a positive charge, and metals do have protons. But since two of them are true, is the likely answer All of the above? This is in the only question out of 84 I can't solve for this chapter. Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think the answer is loosely bound. I don't really see why the others would have an impact.
 
Protons are stuck in the nucleus. They have a lot of trouble moving. Electrons, on the other hand, are relatively free in the electron clouds and easily move.

The size or sign of the charge has nothing to do with it. It is true that electrons are smaller, but it is not relevant to conduction of charge.

Sorry to hear about having to care for the dying. Don't worry about the little outburst. Everybody gets like that every now and then. =]

cookiemonster
 
Thx to both of you. I will go with "Loosely bound" as my answer. I thought "smaller" had something to do with carrying the charge, something about electrons not getting stuck somewhere inside the wires of things, but I guess that's not part of the answer. Thanks again.
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top