h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I think this argument is over, but, if not here's the deal...the car door is at the same electical potential as the filler since the whokle vehicle is both metal and a good conductor. The filler is at the same potential as the door. When a person touches the door any difference in potential is eliminated and the person no longer has the ability to cause a static discharge....A truck or vehicle dragging a chain on the ground is aimed at a different problem...not on nylons dragging over a seat in cool dry air...

Ex-PFC Wintergreen

Traveller in Time on the drawing board
"I do not see the argument, it is terminology I think.
(-)
/--@-----\ (-)
[#CAR#]
_


The car is standing on the ground, earth, whatever you name it.
The wheels touch the ground.
The wheels are made of an insulator.
The car chassis is and stays charged.

You jump out.
(-)
/--@-----\ (-)
[#CAR#](-)
_

During jump you are charged.





The large surface of your feet touch the .
You get discharged.

You stand near the car.
(-)
/--@-----\ (-)
[#CAR#]
_


You are earth the car is charged.

You touch the car.

/--@-----\
[#CAR#]==
_



Well do not touch it with the fueltap !


Internal in the car electronic we use the earth as reference to the car chassis, the car is an on its own. "

I just wanted to be the person who replied to the coolest/amazingest/constructivest use of smilies in H2G2 that I have seen.

I love the pictures!

Traveller in Time
"Good you like the pictures, does it show we are all talking about the same thing? "

Just to say I liked them too . The science you were trying to convey also seems correct to my way of thinking ok>

I understand now that we are all talking about the same thing. Do you think it might be helpful to copy the text you are talking about and then show how it could be reworded to become factually accurate?

- Wintergreen

It's such a shame that I can't put smileys in the entry...

Am in the middle of updating but got to go feed 2 starving boys and will be back later.

Is there anything else that needs to be done to this entry?

Interesting article. You are daring to undertake it if you shy away from the scientific part, which is after all the major part. Perhaps you should collaborate with a who will take full responsibility for the wording. It's not fair to expect you to translate science into your own words and at the same time expect the translation to be scientifically correct.

I can't really follow "Internal in the car electronic we use the earth as reference to the car chassis, the car is an earth on its own." I think I get the drift, but it must be possible to say that more clearly.

Discalimer: I am not the required . Ask Gnomon.

One spelling: Parisien is French for a male Parisian. If you want to describe Parisian ladies in French it should be Parisienne. That looks unnecessarily affected; stick to Parisian (covers male & female, in English).

I really want this entry edited.
I undertook it as it was requested of me to add "the science bit" when I placed it in PR last March.
I shied away then.
But I'm going through unfinished entries already created before I start any more.
I really think this is a useful article, as many people suffer from SED's but don't know how to prevent them, and I *still* don't understand the science, even though people have tried to explain it to me..I just haven't got a scientific brain.

The two errors you point out were in fact provided by others and I will correct them now, although I don't know how to reword what Traveller In Time said

Thank you for reading the entry Recumbentman.

I'm not entirely happy with this sentence:

"'Static electricity' means 'high voltage'".

What it means literally is 'electricity that doesn't move.

I would suggest re-wording it along the lines of:

Static electricity means 'electricity at rest, in contrast to current (or 'dynamic' electricity.

Then after your bit about the high charges, say,' The effects of static electricity are due purely to the electrostatic field produced by the charge, whereas in current electricity other effects, principally an electromagnetic field are also involved.


Then you have a Header following which you say, 'protons, neutrons and electrons are very different from each other'

I would suggest that before this you say that,

All matter is made up of atoms, which themselves are made up of protons, neutrons and electrons.

Thanks very much, radioactiveBigAl1

Do people accept TiT's explanation? It doesn't fit in with the other theories in the entry at all!

If TiT's account is true, then the reason you get a shock from the door of the car is because you are at earth and the car is charged. It is nothing whatsoever to do with friction from the seats, since any charge you get from them is earthed when you touch the ground.

Has anyone done any experiments, say with a gold leaf electroscope which can be used for detecting static charges?

Traveller in Time walking in a cloud of water vapour
"Nope, I am always neutral

Just waiting for someone to make the wording of the entry less 'scientific' and more 'Galaxy babe'

Well, perhaps there are still some technical flaws in the story, mainly for which of the objects is charged and which is neutral. "

The person is charged; the car is at earth potential. The person becomes charged due to:

(a) the wearing of synthetic fabrics which easily acquire a static charge
(b) Friction of surfaces rubbing together.

When the car is in motion, a static charge is built up due to the interacton between tyres and road, which is transmitted to, and accumulates on, the person.

When the person leaves the car, frequently a spark is seen/heard to move from a person's e.g. fingertip to the metal of the car as the static charge is discharged (to earth).

That is my understanding

That doesn't make much sense.

You say the car accumulates a charge by driving, which it transmits to the person. By this reasoning the person and the car are at the same potential. But then you say the person gets a shock from the car. Which suggests they are at a different potential.

The car is standing on the ground or earth. The wheels touch the ground. The wheels are made of an insulator. The car chassis is (and stays) charged.

Sentence 3: The TYRES are made of an insulator

Sentence 4: This would be true if the car didn't have a static conductor (e.g. a chain). However, I think most modern cars have a mechanism for allowing for discharge of static charges so, in most cases these days, the car would be at earth potential. (I think this is where some confusion has arisen, and the confusion is due to semantics. A static chock is caused when electrons jump from one material/surface to another. It doesn't really matter which direction the electrons are going. In some instances the person will be charged and the car at earth potential; in others the person may have become discharged, but the car still be at high potential - particularly if it doesn't have a static conductor. This is the scenario described by .

Ref modern cars having a mechanism for discharging static; I read somewhere about some cars being fitted with a button which one pushes to discharge static charges. I mentioned it in a post above? Anyone know which model(s)?

Well, I liken it to the van der Graaf generator. The person is the dome and the route the electrons take is the belt. If one tried to draw a diagram of what happens, (in a v.d.G) one would draw more electrons on the dome than on the belt.