Does a proton signify lack of electrons?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rejjy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Electrons Proton
AI Thread Summary
A proton is a positively charged particle found in the nucleus of an atom, while electrons are negatively charged and reside in a "cloud" around the nucleus. When objects are rubbed together, electrons are transferred, resulting in one object becoming negatively charged and the other positively charged. This process does not imply that protons are entities that have lost electrons; rather, protons and electrons exist in a balanced state within atoms. The movement of electrons is much easier due to their lower mass compared to protons, which remain fixed in the nucleus. Understanding this distinction clarifies the relationship between protons and electrons in atomic structure.
Rejjy
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I have learned that by rubbing, electrons are transferred from one object to another, making the gainer negatively charged and the loser positively charged.

I also know that a proton is positively charged.

Does it signify that a proton was once an entity that has lost its electrons?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Since atoms are made of equal numbers of protons and electrons (and neutrons, but they don't make charge), when the electrons are transferred it leaves an atom with more of one or the other. Protons themselves are particles that have a positive charge, while electrons are particles that have the same amount of charge, only negative.
 
An atom consists of a tiny nucleus where the Protons and Neutrons reside, and a "cloud" of electrons. Electrons are far less massive than protons are and their position as the outside of the atom allows them to easily move around compared to protons. For a proton to move around the entire atom would have to move as well. Hence only electrons are transferred when you rub things together.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atom
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
It may be shown from the equations of electromagnetism, by James Clerk Maxwell in the 1860’s, that the speed of light in the vacuum of free space is related to electric permittivity (ϵ) and magnetic permeability (μ) by the equation: c=1/√( μ ϵ ) . This value is a constant for the vacuum of free space and is independent of the motion of the observer. It was this fact, in part, that led Albert Einstein to Special Relativity.
Back
Top