TR3driver said:
TR6oldtimer said:
Electricity does not care what polarity it is to make a spark. The difference in potential and the resistance it has to overcome is the same. The only difference is in the spark plug design. If the anode and cathode were of the same design, the voltage potential to make the spark would also be the same. Polarity does not matter.
Sorry, Ray, but I disagree. At least part of the difference is because the center electrode gets much hotter than the ground electrode does. It's easier to break electrons away from the hotter material, hence easier to form a spark when the hotter material is negative. Much the same way a vacuum tube diode works.
https://www.radio-electronics.com/info/da...rial-basics.php
You have made my point. Electricity does not care which way a charge is placed on two IDENTICAL plates. However, a bias can certainly be created by the design of the device. The vacuum tube is an example of this applied bias, that is the cathode is purposely heated to facilitate the release of electrons by exciting the metal and their electrons to a higher energy state, thus reducing the voltage differential needed to free them.
Now whether the anode or the cathode of a spark plug is designed with the same consideration in mind, that is to enhance the flow of electrons, I can not say with authority. It may be just an artifact of the way a spark plug is designed to accommodate the violent environment it must endure.
Oh, on lead acid batteries, yes they can be charged backwards, although as in the example of the vacuum tube, their design bias will probably reduce their efficiency if one were to do that.
Now on the topic of what is current, the one that I really have a difficult time getting my hands around is the theory of protons as current. Unlike electrons, protons are tightly bound in the nucleus of the atom. The binding energy of the nucleons is tremendous when compared to the electrical attraction of an electron to the nucleus. To understand how strong the binding force is, one only needs to consider what it takes to keep two positively charged nucleons in close proximity to each other.
The notion of free protons implies to me, there must be for some period of time an atom that has changed it's atomic structure and during that brief time the binding energy of the nucleon is released. Then to return to it's original atomic structure, the same energy would need to be applied when replacing the 'lost' proton. I suppose this phenomena could occur in such a small time frame that any energy released when a proton is kicked free is immediately applied to bind another.
Like I said, it is a concept I do not have the physics to comprehend.