Re: [Vo]: Re: Army paper on lifters
- Original Message - From: Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 6:35 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Army paper on lifters Ion is a Greek word isn't it? Ion means something that goes in Greek. Scientific term introduced by Faraday in his Experimental Researches in Electricity, seventh series (1834): http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/14986 665. Finally, I require a term to express those bodies which can pass to the electrodes, or, as they are usually called, the poles. Substances are frequently spoken of as being electro-negative, or electro-positive, according as they go under the supposed influence of a direct attraction to the positive or negative pole. But these terms are much too significant for the use to which I should have to put them; for though the meanings are perhaps right, they are only hypothetical, and may be wrong; and then, through a very imperceptible, but still very dangerous, because continual, influence, they do great injury to science, by contracting and limiting the habitual views of those engaged in pursuing it. I propose to distinguish such bodies by calling those anions158 which go to the anode of the decomposing body; and those passing to the cathode, cations159; and when I have occasion to speak of these together, I shall call them ions. -- Michel
Re: [Vo]: Re: Army paper on lifters
Michel Jullian wrote: - Original Message - From: Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 6:35 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Army paper on lifters Ion is a Greek word isn't it? Ion means something that goes in Greek. Scientific term introduced by Faraday in his Experimental Researches in Electricity, seventh series (1834): http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/14986 665. Finally, I require a term to express those bodies which can pass to the electrodes, or, as they are usually called, the poles. Substances are frequently spoken of as being electro-negative, or electro-positive, according as they go under the supposed influence of a direct attraction to the positive or negative pole. But these terms are much too significant for the use to which I should have to put them; for though the meanings are perhaps right, they are only hypothetical, and may be wrong; and then, through a very imperceptible, but still very dangerous, because continual, influence, they do great injury to science, by contracting and limiting the habitual views of those engaged in pursuing it. I propose to distinguish such bodies by calling those anions158 which go to the anode of the decomposing body; and those passing to the cathode, cations159; and when I have occasion to speak of these together, I shall call them ions. -- Michel Faraday demonstrates his own preference for the atomic hypothesis when he uses the term those bodies. Harry
Re: [Vo]: Re: Army paper on lifters
I see nothing misleading in either term Harry, drift describes accurately what the ions do wrt the neutrals, and wind describes accurately what the neutrals do while entrained by the drifting ions. I agree ion wind is misleading though, because it could easily be mistaken for ionic wind (a wind of ions). It would have been better to call it ion induced wind or ion entrained wind. Note there are many scientific terms which would benefit from a change, e.g. anode and cathode should be renamed by their original names eisode and exode as I mentioned once cf wikipedia, but one can't change engrained habits, think of all the textbooks which would have to be rewritten :-) Michel Professional arbiter, whale herder, etymologist, and general purpose mad scientist ;-) - Original Message - From: Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 7:05 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Army paper on lifters ... Anyway beware that what they call ionic drift is what the rest of the world calls ion wind (ion induced wind of neutrals, as in paddle induced flow of water), aka ion drag, aka electric wind, aka corona wind, and what they call ballistic ionic wind or ionic wind has nothing to do with ion wind. If they had known the correct terms they might have found relevant literature on the subject lol :) Michel For this phenomena drift and wind are both misleading terms...if you ask me. Harry
Re: [Vo]: Re: Army paper on lifters
Michel Jullian wrote: I see nothing misleading in either term Harry, drift describes accurately what the ions do wrt the neutrals, and wind describes accurately what the neutrals do while entrained by the drifting ions. Drift and wind in everyday language connote circumstances and forces beyond our control. Here the circumstances have been engineered and the forces can be turned on and off at will. I agree ion wind is misleading though, because it could easily be mistaken for ionic wind (a wind of ions). It would have been better to call it ion induced wind or ion entrained wind. Ion is a Greek word isn't it? What is Greek for wind? Put them together and you have coined a new technical term. Note there are many scientific terms which would benefit from a change, e.g. anode and cathode should be renamed by their original names eisode and exode as I mentioned once cf wikipedia, but one can't change engrained habits, think of all the textbooks which would have to be rewritten :-) Michel Well it is all Greek to me! ;-) Harry
Re: [Vo]: Re: Army paper on lifters
Michel Jullian wrote: Yes I have read it a long time ago, the poor fellows just didn't have a clue :) Are you a professional arbiter of some kind? 'Cause it really shows. ;-) Anyway beware that what they call ionic drift is what the rest of the world calls ion wind (ion induced wind of neutrals, as in paddle induced flow of water), aka ion drag, aka electric wind, aka corona wind, and what they call ballistic ionic wind or ionic wind has nothing to do with ion wind. If they had known the correct terms they might have found relevant literature on the subject lol :) Michel For this phenomena drift and wind are both misleading terms...if you ask me. Harry
