Hacker News Reader

Comment by emcrazyone | Hacker News Reader

Couldn't read much past the statement:

"Electricity is briefly defined as the flow of electric charge, but there’s so much behind that simple statement"

Electricity is the force not the flow. The flow is the current. The term, "Electricity" in every college course I had on it in getting my degrees is always the EMF (Electromotive Force).

Sorry to nit pick but I just have a real problem when articles are written from sense of authority (An electronics company) and don't get the details correct. It can kick off a cycle of incorrect learning and confusion if you're relatively new and getting into electronics.

View on HN

I disagree with the nitpick. Electricity is not a technical term. In its common usage, it encompasses many effects and broadly invokes many technical concepts, i.e. among them EMF or voltage, current, electromagnetic waves, etc. etc.

This article is not written for physicists, engineers, or anyone else so technically trained. If it were, it would read as follows: "Electricity is a vague term used to variously refer to the many aspects of electromagnetic phenomena."

If you want to keep that sentence, and cover your bases, you could reword as "the flow of electric charge, the potential to cause the same." And in any case, the escape clause already exists as "there’s so much behind that simple statement."

What proof do you have the article wasn't written for physicists, engineers or anyone else so technically trained?

This is the basis for not agreeing? If it is, then it seems you drew an assumption then formed an opinon that is contrary to many college level courses, texts, and teachings I've sat through where electricity is carefully described as the force alone.

> What proof do you have the article wasn't written for physicists, engineers or anyone else so technically trained?

It's defining the term 'electricity', for a start.

To say electricity is roughly the flow of charge looks perfectly fine to me. Opening statement of the wikipedia article on electricity:

> Electricity is the set of physical phenomena associated with the presence and flow of electric charge.

I doubt the article will steer people wrong. The gravity/e-field analogy is accurate, and they're clear to state that Bohr model of the atom is a useful model while providing a link to more info so interested readers could dig in there if they wanted.

> Electricity is the force not the flow...."Electricity"...is always the EMF

Speaking of details the Electromotive Force isn't a force because it doesn't have Newtons for units. EMF times charge does give a force but EMF alone is just Volts. In circuits we may think of it as if it's a force, and it has force in the name, but it's just a potential difference.

Lol, so if it's on Wikipedia it must be true and accurate. Nice. Hey, if it's on the Internet then it must be true.

I think it is reckless. A lot of young up and coming engineers perhaps use sparkfun for their high school electronics work might read this and come away with incorrect understanding of things making new material confusing or longer to understand.

You think what's reckless? The guy who wrote the article has a degree in Electrical Engineering and the article's great.

EMF is not a force and it's not the only thing the word electricity refers to. I've just checked a physics and an electrical engineering textbook and neither refer to electricity or EMF the way you are. I honestly don't know where you're getting these ideas.

In physics there is a fundamental force sosmetimes called The Electromagnetic Force, and in a sense it does describe all of electricity, but it's not the same thing as The Electromotive Force.

I just sent your feedback to Sparkfun: https://twitter.com/SunSparc/status/655108454042832896

We will see if they update it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com