B Conductors in the triboelectric series

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter KV789
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Conductors Series
AI Thread Summary
In teaching electricity, it's important to clarify the behavior of conductors like copper in the context of the triboelectric series. While copper is a good conductor with loosely held outer electrons, it can become negatively charged when rubbed against insulators like wool or glass. This occurs because the insulators have a stronger affinity for electrons, effectively stripping them from the copper and creating a local positive charge on the metal's surface. The process highlights the balance between electron affinity and conductivity, illustrating that conductors can still lose electrons under certain conditions. Understanding this interaction is key to explaining the nuances of static electricity in educational settings.
KV789
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I teach electricity in grade 9. For the concept of conductors, they are described in the textbook as atoms where the outer electrons can easily move from one atom to another (e.g. copper). But I noticed that on the triboelectric series, copper and other metals are listed as having a strong(er) hold on electrons when charged by friction with something like wool or glass (which are considered electric insulators). I guess my question is how do I explain why copper becomes negative when rubbed with insulators like wool/silk/glass if copper also has a weaker hold on its outer electrons as a conductor?

Any insight would be appreciated! Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF.
That is a really good question, and I also want to know the answer.

Maybe electrons are being wiped from the insulator because they prefer the more positive copper where the surface has been swept clear of some electrons, inducing a local positive charge at the point of contact.
 
I think this is all about the "wool/silk/glass" and how much it wants to grab an extra electron. Metals can easily give up their conduction band electrons to a receptor. If so, it will then be harder to remove additional electrons from the metal because of the charge imbalance.
 
This is from Griffiths' Electrodynamics, 3rd edition, page 352. I am trying to calculate the divergence of the Maxwell stress tensor. The tensor is given as ##T_{ij} =\epsilon_0 (E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} E^2)+\frac 1 {\mu_0}(B_iB_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} B^2)##. To make things easier, I just want to focus on the part with the electrical field, i.e. I want to find the divergence of ##E_{ij}=E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij}E^2##. In matrix form, this tensor should look like this...
Thread 'Applying the Gauss (1835) formula for force between 2 parallel DC currents'
Please can anyone either:- (1) point me to a derivation of the perpendicular force (Fy) between two very long parallel wires carrying steady currents utilising the formula of Gauss for the force F along the line r between 2 charges? Or alternatively (2) point out where I have gone wrong in my method? I am having problems with calculating the direction and magnitude of the force as expected from modern (Biot-Savart-Maxwell-Lorentz) formula. Here is my method and results so far:- This...
Back
Top