"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong and incorrect!
How can some people's minds be so ineffective at thinking?

I know it is pointless to argue with you but:

Perhaps you ******s would understand it better using flashlight D cells
as an example. Take one D cell that is half charged (Ni-Cad) and put it
into
a two-cell flashlight in the company of another NI-Cad) D cell that is
fully
charged and turn on the switch. The bulb will light and current will
pass through the circuit. As well as working to light the bulb, the
fully-charged cell will discharge into the half charge cell until
the voltage in both cells equalizes.

Perhaps you could try to envision in which direction current flows through
the empty cell in this example and next, try to envision in which direction
current flows when *charging* a cell. Or even better: try this example for
yourself.

I hope this helps.

Certainly not.

Meindert

"Meindert Sprang" wrote in message ...
"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong and incorrect!
How can some people's minds be so ineffective at thinking?

I know it is pointless to argue with you but:

Perhaps you ******s would understand it better using flashlight D cells
as an example. Take one D cell that is half charged (Ni-Cad) and put it
into
a two-cell flashlight in the company of another NI-Cad) D cell that is
fully
charged and turn on the switch. The bulb will light and current will
pass through the circuit. As well as working to light the bulb, the
fully-charged cell will discharge into the half charge cell until
the voltage in both cells equalizes.

Perhaps you could try to envision in which direction current flows through
the empty cell in this example and next, try to envision in which direction
current flows when *charging* a cell. Or even better: try this example for
yourself.

I hope this helps.

Certainly not.

Meindert


So even an engineer might understand. . .

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../leadacid.html

Engineers look at a battery as a physical object while an electrician looks
at it as a container for a chemical reactions that store and release electricity.

Higher voltage than a fully charge battery can supply, when applied to the
battery terminals drives the chemical reaction and changes it from releasing
electrons to storing electrons but does not reverse the current as most dumb
engineers claim.

Read the above link carefully and click on all the links and perhaps you
will understand the error of your thinking.

You're welcomd.

CN

Capt. Neal® wrote:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../leadacid.html

Higher voltage than a fully charge battery can supply, when applied to the
battery terminals drives the chemical reaction and changes it from
releasing electrons to storing electrons but does not reverse the current as most
dumb engineers claim.

Oh? So how come the little arrow marked "I" (current) has changed
direction between the third and fourth pictures?

Pete

"Pete Verdon" d wrote in message ...
Capt. Neal® wrote:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../leadacid.html

Higher voltage than a fully charge battery can supply, when applied to the
battery terminals drives the chemical reaction and changes it from releasing electrons to storing electrons but does not reverse
the current as most dumb engineers claim.

Oh? So how come the little arrow marked "I" (current) has changed direction between the third and fourth pictures?


Duh! That is an EXTERNAL circuit. Note how there is never an arrow
shown inside the battery - only chemical reactions shown because
there is no internal circuit.

CN

Capt. Neal® wrote:
"Pete Verdon" d wrote
Capt. Neal® wrote:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../leadacid.html

does not reverse the
current as most dumb engineers claim.

Oh? So how come the little arrow marked "I" (current) has changed
direction between the third and fourth pictures?

Duh! That is an EXTERNAL circuit. Note how there is never an arrow
shown inside the battery - only chemical reactions shown because
there is no internal circuit.

That's lovely. I'm not discussing whether there's a circuit inside the
battery. I'm addressing your claim that current in the external circuit
flows the same way for charging and discharging/use. The picture you
pointed to quite clearly contradicts that claim.

Pete

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...

So even an engineer might understand. . .

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../leadacid.html

Engineers look at a battery as a physical object while an electrician
looks
at it as a container for a chemical reactions that store and release
electricity.

Higher voltage than a fully charge battery can supply, when applied to the
battery terminals drives the chemical reaction and changes it from
releasing
electrons to storing electrons but does not reverse the current as most
dumb
engineers claim.

Read the above link carefully and click on all the links and perhaps you
will understand the error of your thinking.

Well, I did. Lucky for me, I studied chemisty as well. And what do I see in
the second picture?
The decomposition of lead and sulphuric acid on the left produces, whait a
minute... electrons!! And wait, what do I see? On the right side, these
electrons are used to combine lead oxide and sulphuric acid into
leadsulphate and water. Sooooo, I see electrons flowing THROUGH the innards
of the battery.
Care to argue with that?

Meindert

"Meindert Sprang" wrote in message ...
"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...

So even an engineer might understand. . .

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../leadacid.html

Engineers look at a battery as a physical object while an electrician
looks
at it as a container for a chemical reactions that store and release
electricity.

Higher voltage than a fully charge battery can supply, when applied to the
battery terminals drives the chemical reaction and changes it from
releasing
electrons to storing electrons but does not reverse the current as most
dumb
engineers claim.

Read the above link carefully and click on all the links and perhaps you
will understand the error of your thinking.

Well, I did. Lucky for me, I studied chemisty as well. And what do I see in
the second picture?
The decomposition of lead and sulphuric acid on the left produces, whait a
minute... electrons!! And wait, what do I see? On the right side, these
electrons are used to combine lead oxide and sulphuric acid into
leadsulphate and water. Sooooo, I see electrons flowing THROUGH the innards
of the battery.
Care to argue with that?

Easy to argue with that. Electrons only "flow" in a conductor. A chemical
reaction is NOT a conductor. Electrons don't flow in a chemical reaction.

A chemical reaction is a chemical reaction.

These particular chemical reactions just happen to change the metal composition
in such a way as to change back and forth metals that store or release electrons
up the plates and out the top and not along a circuit through the electrolyte.
There is no "flow" in the traditional sense of the word between the positive
and negative plates. No circuit. Where there is no circuit there is no flow.

CN

Capt. Neal® wrote:

Care to argue with that?


Easy to argue with that. Electrons only "flow" in a conductor. A chemical
reaction is NOT a conductor. Electrons don't flow in a chemical reaction.

Duh, do a Google search on "Redox" reactions. Electron flow is exactly
what's happening.

A chemical reaction is a chemical reaction.

These particular chemical reactions just happen to change the metal
composition
in such a way as to change back and forth metals that store or release
electrons
up the plates and out the top and not along a circuit through the
electrolyte.
There is no "flow" in the traditional sense of the word between the
positive
and negative plates. No circuit. Where there is no circuit there is no
flow.

Dude, you've been draggin' your appendage in the dirt so long on this
one, you could see the lines from Soyuz. Give it up. Cretin.

Hope this helps,

Keith

"Keith Hughes" wrote in message ...
Capt. Neal® wrote:

Care to argue with that?


Easy to argue with that. Electrons only "flow" in a conductor. A chemical
reaction is NOT a conductor. Electrons don't flow in a chemical reaction.

Duh, do a Google search on "Redox" reactions. Electron flow is exactly what's happening.

A chemical reaction is a chemical reaction.

These particular chemical reactions just happen to change the metal composition
in such a way as to change back and forth metals that store or release electrons
up the plates and out the top and not along a circuit through the electrolyte.
There is no "flow" in the traditional sense of the word between the positive
and negative plates. No circuit. Where there is no circuit there is no flow.

Dude, you've been draggin' your appendage in the dirt so long on this one, you could see the lines from Soyuz. Give it up. Cretin.

Hope this helps,


I right. Why should I give up? It looks like it is you who have tossed in
the towel. I seem to be making inroads into the ignorance.

CN

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...

Easy to argue with that. Electrons only "flow" in a conductor. A chemical
reaction is NOT a conductor. Electrons don't flow in a chemical reaction.

Well, you picture you quoted clearly says so. And apart from that, an
electrolyte IS an conductor, that is why it is called an electrolyte.

A chemical reaction is a chemical reaction.

Indeed, with movement of electrons, as in Redox reactions.

These particular chemical reactions just happen to change the metal
composition
in such a way as to change back and forth metals that store or release
electrons
up the plates and out the top and not along a circuit through the
electrolyte.
There is no "flow" in the traditional sense of the word between the
positive
and negative plates. No circuit. Where there is no circuit there is no
flow.

Ah, and where there is no brain, there is no sense in arguing......
I rest my case.

Meindert