What's the Difference Between Positive and Negative?

[sophiecentaur]

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.

 

[sophiecentaur]

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.

 

[Zayl]

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.

 

[sophiecentaur]

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'?

 

[Zayl]

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.

 

[sophiecentaur]

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.