What's the Difference Between Positive and Negative?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the distinction between positive and negative polarities, specifically in the context of electric charge on particles such as electrons and protons. Participants explore the historical and conceptual underpinnings of these designations, touching on their implications in various contexts including electronics and electrochemistry.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire about the specific causes of the distinction between positive and negative polarity in charged particles, particularly electrons and protons.
  • Others suggest that the labels of positive and negative were somewhat arbitrary, chosen before the discovery of electrons, and could have been assigned differently.
  • A participant mentions early experiments with charged objects that led to the conclusion of two types of electric charge, which were labeled as positive and negative.
  • There is a discussion about how the flow of electricity involves electrons moving from the negative terminal to the positive terminal, which can confuse students due to the negative charge of electrons.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the historical context of the naming conventions, with references to Benjamin Franklin's role in labeling the poles.
  • One participant suggests that the choice of signs might relate to the behavior of charges in electrolytic cells, questioning if there was a basis for the choice beyond arbitrariness.
  • Another participant raises the idea that the labeling could be based on triboelectric charge and its interactions with surrounding objects.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the reasons behind the distinction between positive and negative charges, with multiple competing views and interpretations presented throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes references to historical figures and concepts that may not be universally agreed upon, and the reasoning behind the choice of positive and negative labels remains unresolved.

  • #31
Jon B said:
So how do we know today what is negative and positive. Bottom line! Is negative an abundance of electrons and positive a depletion?
Yes but that is a totally circular argument. More electrons = more negative charges because we define the 'negative' charge either arbitrarily or possibly according to some entirely different criterion other than the presence of extra electrons. We do not "know" we made a choice and it is consistent with having 'negative' electrons.
It is surely possible to appreciate how people who happen to be ignorant of a fact, can come to conclusions without that knowledge.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Zayl said:
It basically relates to what causes one direction of motion to occur as opposed to the opposite direction of motion.
Not really, because the direction of the other field (magnetic or electric) also comes into the equation to give a direction of motion. You have to commit to some arbitrary sign for that before you do your test with a moving electron.
We're not dealing with Philosophy here. We are just deciding about a choice of sign - or rather what that choice was based on.
People on the planet Zog could have chosen a + sign and nothing would be essentially different.
 
  • #33
sophiecentaur said:
Not really, because the direction of the other field (magnetic or electric) also comes into the equation to give a direction of motion. You have to commit to some arbitrary sign for that before you do your test with a moving electron.
We're not dealing with Philosophy here. We are just deciding about a choice of sign - or rather what that choice was based on.
People on the planet Zog could have chosen a + sign and nothing would be essentially different.

As the statement in the bottom of your post says; the enemy of understanding is classification. Thus in order to understand beyond the classifications in physics, it would be a matter of philosophy. As you say the direction of fields come into play, and charge, and these properties determine direction of motion (in a way we do not know how). I have published an article about it however but I'm afraid that it is beyond the scope of this forum.
 
  • #34
Zayl said:
As the statement in the bottom of your post says; the enemy of understanding is classification. Thus in order to understand beyond the classifications in physics, it would be a matter of philosophy. As you say the direction of fields come into play, and charge, and these properties determine direction of motion (in a way we do not know how). I have published an article about it however but I'm afraid that it is beyond the scope of this forum.
I don't see that the arbitrary choice of a sign is a particularly big issue. The only thing to 'discuss' here is to discuss the possible (very practical) reasons for choosing it the way it is if indeed there was any basis. How is that a philosophical matter? You seem to be looking for something to do with the Motion of a charged object that would yield an absolute positiveness or negativeness. Rules / observations such as 'like charges repel and unlike charges attract' - or the left hand motor rule, all are self relational and would work the same whichever choice was made.
What else do you think could make the issue more 'philosophical'?
 
  • #35
sophiecentaur said:
I don't see that the arbitrary choice of a sign is a particularly big issue. The only thing to 'discuss' here is to discuss the possible (very practical) reasons for choosing it the way it is if indeed there was any basis. How is that a philosophical matter? You seem to be looking for something to do with the Motion of a charged object that would yield an absolute positiveness or negativeness. Rules / observations such as 'like charges repel and unlike charges attract' - or the left hand motor rule, all are self relational and would work the same whichever choice was made.
What else do you think could make the issue more 'philosophical'?

These classifications are not philosophical, since they are the very definitions which mainstream physics is based upon. However explaining what charge is beyond classifications of signs becomes philosophical.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sophiecentaur
  • #36
Zayl said:
These classifications are not philosophical, since they are the very definitions which mainstream physics is based upon. However explaining what charge is beyond classifications of signs becomes philosophical.
Very much so.
 

Similar threads

High School Questions about the Universe: Positive & negative fields and effects
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Undergrad Potential difference between a battery's terminal and Earth ground
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
High School Is there some electrical charge that is neither positive nor negative?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
High School Some Questions about Electric Current/Capacitors to help my understanding
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Undergrad Lichtenberg Figures: Positive & Negative Discharges on Plastics & Acrylic
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
High School Electric Field Direction: Are We Assuming a Universal Positive Frame?
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
Undergrad Explaining the magnetic (cable) paradox
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Undergrad Is the current related to a path or to potential difference?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
High School Direction of Electric Field & Field Due to a Dipole
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
High School What is the difference btwn positive and negative electrodes
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K