I wonder if the interaction between the flour and the container produces
an voltage gradient at the surface which then provides the bias
(symmetry breaking) that catalysies the creation of the formation of a
macroscopic voltage gradient. I have mentioned Jerry Pollacks work in
another reply on this thread. The action of a surface as an initial
catylyst would mirror the way that significant potential gradiants (100s
of mV not many volts however) can build up in water as a result of
surface charge at the boundary.
Nigel.
On 13/03/2014 21:18, David Roberson wrote:
I wonder if the fact that a different charge appears on the first
separating grains which then biases the process to enhance that
effect. I always seek out positive feedback mechanisms and this might
be another.
Something of this nature could make sense since the particles with the
initial charge impacts other particles nearest to them greater than
those at a distance. It would be interesting to determine what
characteristics are common to the powders most active. Do they
polarize easily? Is the dielectric constant the most important
parameter? Of course conductive particles could not behave this way
since the charges would leak off.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: mixent <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Thu, Mar 13, 2014 4:55 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:unknown mechanism generates voltage in the powder cracks
In reply to H Veeder's message of Wed, 12 Mar 2014 17:16:06 -0400:
Hi Harry,
[snip]
>> When grains made of long chain molecules rub against one another molecules
>> can
>> be broken (this should happen with some plastics too). When a molecule
>> breaks,
>> it can either form two neutral molecules, or a pair of ions. The latter
>> constitute opposing charges on two separate grains (each gets part of the
>> original molecule). Breaking into two charged ions may be more likely in
>> molecules containing atoms such as Oxygen which tend to hold onto excess
>> electrons, thus retaining a negative charge.
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robin van Spaandonk
>>
>>http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>>
>>
>
>Here is another story about the same research. Apparently they detected
>the same effect with "glass particles".
>http://www.livescience.com/43686-earthquake-lights-possible-cause.html
>
>If ions are formed in the way you describe wouldn't these microscopic
>charge differences
>tend to cancel out at the macroscopic level?
>
>Harry
Yes, I would think so. That's the flaw in my theory. When two different
substances rub together, one will probably have a greater electron affinity than
the other, which would explain bulk polarization of charge, however the same
can't be said for a single substance. I guess that's why they are so puzzled.
Now I am too. :)
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
