The discussion revolves around the behavior of excess electrons in charged objects, particularly focusing on their location within materials and the process by which two neutrally charged objects become charged when rubbed together. The conversation touches on concepts from electrostatics and the triboelectric effect, exploring both theoretical and practical implications.
Participants express differing views on the behavior of electrons in charged objects and the processes involved in charging through friction. There is no consensus on the explanations provided, and the discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives.
Some limitations include the dependence on definitions of charge distribution, the complexity of interactions at the molecular level, and the unresolved nature of how exactly electrons behave in different materials under various conditions.
If that were the case,there would not have been any ionic compounds formed!Scheuerf said:I would think that the electrons would prefer to keep both objects neutral.
Usually an object (especially one made of insulating material) acquires a charge by contact with other materials (as when a comb is rubbed with a pice of cloth). It's therefore usually (a very small fraction of) molecules on the surface which gain or lose electrons (usually only one electron on anyone affected molecule). Conductors can also be charged. Again it is surface atoms or molecules which have the extra electron or are missing the electron. This time, though, the reason is rather different. Even if charge were to be deposited inside the object, it would migrate to the surface, essentially because of mutual repulsion.Scheuerf said:When an object has excess electrons and is charged where are they?
A conductor loves to do just that, the electrons are merely the means. It seems to me you think of a charged mass like a battery, with cells full of electrons bouncing around ready to go to work. In concept it is the same, but in static situations where Faraday pioneered, a use for the energy needs to exist, i.e. ground short, to induce a flow. The inspiring fact of the day to remember is that the energy has more tendency to stay where it is at as an electron at rest, than it does to move with relativistic but otherwise known as invariant mass, that would vacate its premises.Scheuerf said:I would think that the electrons would prefer to keep both objects neutral.
jerromyjon said:A conductor loves to do just that, the electrons are merely the means. It seems to me you think of a charged mass like a battery, with cells full of electrons bouncing around ready to go to work. In concept it is the same, but in static situations where Faraday pioneered, a use for the energy needs to exist, i.e. ground short, to induce a flow. The inspiring fact of the day to remember is that the energy has more tendency to stay where it is at as an electron at rest, than it does to move with relativistic but otherwise known as invariant mass, that would vacate its premises.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triboelectric_effectScheuerf said:Also when two neutrally charged objects are rubbed together why do they both become charged? I would think that the electrons would prefer to keep both objects neutral.