Yet another room temp superconductor "breakthrough"

[230RN]

GRATUITOUS QUICK REVIEW

"THIS WILL HURT ME MORE THAN IT HURTS YOU."

WHY IS POWER = I² R ?

CURRENT IS "I,' OR "INTENSITY," IN AMPERES
VOLTAGE IS "E," OR "ELECTROMOTIVE FORCE," IN VOLTS
RESISTANCE IS "R" OR RESISTANCE IN FRENCH, IN OHMS.

ELECTRICAL CURRENT THROUGH A CIRCUIT IS PROPORTIONAL TO THE APPLIED VOLTAGE AND INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL TO THE CIRCUIT RESISTANCE.  THIS IS OYHM'S LAW, I = E / R

THIS IS INTUITIVE, LIKE VOLUME OF WATER THROUGH A PIPE DEPENDS ON THE PRESSURE AND THE RESISTANCE OF THE PIPE.

POWER IS VOLTAGE TIMES CURRENT, OR E TIMES I, WHERE VOLTAGE IS THE PRESSURE, AND NUMBER OF ELECTRONS PER SECOND INCLUDES THE TIME INVOLVED, JUST LIKE IN

1  HORSEPOWER = 550 POUNDS RAISED A FOOT IN ONE SECOND. (550 FOOT-POUNDS PER SECOND).

THAT IS, POWER IS THE AMOUNT OF WORK DONE  IN THE TIME INVOLVED.

FOR ELECTRICITY, POWER IS THE NUMBER OF ELECTRONS PER SECOND (AMPERES) TIMES THE PRESSURE (VOLTAGE) INVOLVED.

EXTRA CREDIT:  NUMBER OF ELECTRONS IS MEASURED IN "COULOMBS."  A COULOMB IS 6.2415 × 10¹⁸ ELECTRONS (OR OTHER CHARGES).  SO ONE AMPERE IS 6.2415 × 10¹⁸ ELECTRONS PER SECOND.  AND THERE'S YOUR TIME ELEMENT FOR "POWER," EMBEDDED IN THE CURRENT MEASUREMENT. 

SO HOW DID "POWER" BECOME I²R?

I = E / R OHM'S LAW

I X R = E BY TRANSPOSING

P = E X I

SUBSTITUTING I X R FOR E,

P =I X R x I

THAT IS,

P=I²R

Terry, 230RN

Note the units have changed names recently.  This demonstrates the concept in our old units.

[230RN]

Me: "The quenching effect is partially true."

But with 20 amps in a 14V DC circuit, opening the contacts will result in a high spike if there's any kind of inductance in the circuit at all.

We're not arguing here, we're observing the difference in ratings with emphasis on one effect versus the other.

If you set up a relay as a buzzer and put a neon bulb across the relay, the bulb will light up from the voltage spike each time the relay opens the contacts.  (Neon normally only ignites around  65  volts.)  As I mentioned, that's how high voltages are generated in many circuits: from the sudden collapse of the magnetic field of an inductance in the circuit.

Tell you what.  You take that relay on your desk and apply whatever the coil voltage is so it closes, and hold on to the coil terminals.  Then have a confederate break the circuit to the coil. You will be shocked <ahem!> by the jolt you get when the magnetic field collapses.

Terry, 230RN

ETA I just noticed this.  I wasn't talking AC voltages peak to peak, but from zero to one peak.

[Nick1911]

I'm well aware of ohms law and power law, but maybe that wasn't posted (in all caps) for me. 

Why are we talking about the coil of the relay now?  I'm just talking about a set of contacts opening and closing.

Are you saying that you believe DC circuits are often more inductive, and the back-emf is why the DC rating on set of contacts is lower? 

Looked up on the internet, since I'm apparently incapable of making this point myself:

An AC waveform consists of a (ideally, mostly) sinusoidal waveform that crosses zero voltage and current periodically.

All wiring has stray inductance, and when contacts are opened the inductance will cause a rise in voltage until there's an arc across the contacts.

There's plasma in the arc that makes the impedance between the contacts much lower than air, meaning the arc will tend to continue as the contacts move further apart.

With the AC waveform, the current crossing zero will extinguish the arc.

With DC, there's no zero crossing, so the contacts are limited to a much lower voltage so that the there's not enough electric field to keep the arc "lit" while the contacts pull apart.

Excess arcing is very damaging to the contacts, and will destroy the breaker if not controlled by observing the ratings.

There are special breakers and relays for higher voltage DC that use various techniques to interrupt the arc like magnetic coils to blow out the arc.

Interrupting DC is harder because there's no zero crossing to extinguish the arc. Therefore there's a lower electric field rating across the contacts for the same contact configuration.

[230RN]

Fine.

That all caps post was not meant for you.  I apologize for not making that clear.

What I was saying was that at least part of the difference in voltage ratings might also (also) be because because of the voltage spikes in opening a switch with an inductive load on it.

I agree with you with the zero-crossing being a possible factor in arcing, but established the point that once an ion path was formed, the zero crossing meant very little.

There are applications where that zero crossing is essential to a device's operation, e.g. silicon controlled rectifiers.


           

Terry, 230RN

[fifth_column]

Preliminary attempts to reproduce the result are negative:

https://www.science20.com/hontas_farmer/reported_failure_to_reproduce_superconductivity_at_room_temperature_in_lk99-256723

[RocketMan]

Preliminary attempts to reproduce the result are negative:

https://www.science20.com/hontas_farmer/reported_failure_to_reproduce_superconductivity_at_room_temperature_in_lk99-256723

Interesting.  My news feed delivered a story where two attempts to reproduce the results had been positive.  It's starting to sound like cold fusion.

[WLJ]

Looking increasingly likely probably not a superconductor

LK-99 Superconductor Update, Was It Just Contamination?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luVJ5IQH4Uo

And Asianometry argues even if it was so what at least as far as CPUs go as other restrictions are at play in CPU design.
Warning, his videos typically go into extreme nerd level detail on computer tech.

LK-99 Wouldn't Have Changed Semiconductors Anyway
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBhBqOirJ4A

[Brad Johnson]

Final answer is "No".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbr0fQfJC-8

Turns out the blips they took as evidencing potential superconductivity were from a property of copper sulfate.

Brad

[K Frame]

Well that's disappointing.