Anyone notice that most of these "How it" whatever websites,
Discovery channel shows, and such, get the physical aspect of
manufacture down (duh, they are filming it), but they always seem
to pull something out of their butts when trying to explain the
science behind how something works? I think this is caused by
having professional writers only having a limited knowledge of
what it is that they are writing about, and winging it when an
item of confusion comes along. Peer review of the final script
obviously is not in the cards.
On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 13:43:23 -0800, email@example.com wrote:
Again, I don't think we'll get anywhere with you saying it's wrong,
and me saying they're both right. We can repeat ourselves until we're
blue in the face, and we'll get nowhere toward the correct answer.
We clearly showed multiple references, some of them from schools and
physics forums, which clearly stated the ground is the return path
back to the power company. This may or may not be true, but, we
can certainly find people stating that this is the case.
But, maybe all those web sites & physics forums are wrong.
If we are to learn the truth, what we need is simply a reliable
reference that says the ground is *not* the return path.
Clearly LOTS of people think it is (I certainly do, and so do the
half dozen scientific, howto, and physics web sites I referenced).
So, if they're all wrong (and they just might be), then there should
be a reference that says that this is wrong. Right?
So, if it is really "nonsense" that the ground is the return path
to the power company, then we should be able to find a reference
that says that.
Don't you think?
I googled, but didn't find it.
Maybe someone else can? (I'm not wedded to an opinion; I only wish for
On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 20:03:04 -0600, Nightcrawler® wrote:
Nope. You saw the references. They were all for standard
power distribution in the United States.
For example, this reference from Smith College, Northampton, MA:
"The power company essentially uses the earth as one of
the wires in the power system. The earth is a pretty good
conductor and it is huge, so it makes a good return path
That's from an EE class:
EGR 220, Spring 2013, Engineering Circuit Theory
Taught by Judith Cardell, who researches this stuff:
So, why do you constantly disparage my comments when I can
easily prove that exactly what I have said all along is being
taught to electrical engineers in college-level courses?
All I'm asking is for you to provide a reference that refutes
the statement above. You can *say* you don't believe it all
you want; but, all I ask is a single reliable reference
backing up the claim that the power company does *not*
use the ground as the a "good return path for electrons".
I won't go into a discussion of how facts at a junior college are any
different than facts at a high school or university, or even those same
facts at the power company (the references I cited were from industry also),
simply because, I'll lose any argument like that on the net due to the
And, I'll stop asking for references that state the currents *don't* go
back to the power company transformers through the ground...
I will simply continue to locate, read, and quote sources that explain the
return path for current, back to the power company's transformers.
The more I read, the more I find that this return path is not
There are local loops, where the math can get complex, so, I'm trying to
unwind this wye-versus-delta thing as we speak ...
Here's a good starter paper on what those ground paths back to the power
supply transformers looks like that I am still reading with great interest:
That's from a company that makes isolation transformers, so, they're not
"junior college" level, right?
On Tuesday, November 26, 2013 9:01:11 AM UTC-5, Danny D'Amico wrote:
What references from industry? Every "reference" you have that I've
seen uses the same exact verbage from "How stuff works" or is in fact
a direct link back to it. One place that got it wrong, cited 10 times,
doesn't make it right.
Actually it is. See the Wikipedia diagram I gave you a link to twice now:
It shows power coming and going on just 3 wires, no planet earth
required. That simple animation shows how it works. Look at that
and tell us why another path is needed.
No and there isn't anything there that says power plants use
the earth as a return path. It's all consistent with what
everyone here has been telling you.
I was taught the same thing, and I'm an Industrial Engineer.
Most EEs don't learn power distribution. Most learn basic
But, when they cover it, at least for us, they tell us that
the earth is the return.
But why does it matter if it's not? It doesn't change the
wiring either way.
On Tuesday, November 26, 2013 12:45:26 PM UTC-5, Harold W. wrote:
It doesn't change what wiring? If grounds had to be sized and
installed to accomodate normal current flow, it certainly does change
wiring in a big way. And that's just one way it changes it.
Also, we just went through the whole discussion of the difference
between a neutral and a ground for a house service. Are you saying
that doesn't matter either?
Did you READ the Preamble to that paper you are quoting??
The NEC, National Electrical Code(Ref.4) requires the installation of
grounds for safety and does NOT allow load currents in ground lines.
Ther is your proof. The NEC is the Electrical BIBLE :')
On Monday, November 25, 2013 6:40:55 PM UTC-5, Danny D'Amico wrote:
You just keep harping back to the same thing. You're asking for us to
prove a negative. And what is really annoying, is that you're so lazy
that you refuse to educate yourself or listen to everyone else here,
who knows a lot more. You didn't know the difference
between a neutral and a ground at your house. You still don't understand
the concept of a neutral, a ground, the difference, on the PRIMARY side.
Neither, apparently does the author of the "How things work piece". That
same exact verbage is in ALL the references you've found, cut and pasted,
or even directly referred back to, yet you keep
claiming you have 6 references. In fact, all you've got is one reference
from a very elementary description, and it's wrong.
I've pointed out several times now, that the same reference, just a
couple sentences earlier, says that the power plant has 3 phase wires,
plus a "neutral or ground". If that's true, then why do you need the
earth as a return path? That statement also shows that the author doesn't
know the difference between a neutral and a ground. Yet, you don't
address that, don't respond to it, just ignore it. Why is that?
I've also tried to educate you on 3 phase power and why those 3 wires
alone are all it takes to deliver power. Those of us familiar with 3 phase
see 3 wires running down a transmission line and know how the power flows,
that just those 3 wires allow the power to flow, no separate earth
return is needed. It's shown here in an animated figure, which I also
Three wires deliver the power. Now explain to us why you need the
earth for a return path? Not understanding 3 phase, you believe the current
needs an earth return, instead of flowing back on the same 3 wires.
And instead of learning, you insist that we do your research for you.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.