1. Home
  2. speakers
  3. 1307681902

How many electrons?

There is a lot of current between your amp and your speakers. Imagine that you are doing some normal listening to your favorite loud music, and consider the number of electrons that move between the amp output poles and the speaker cables every second, in either direction.

Among the following estimates for the number of such electrons, which one is the most accurate?

a) None
b) Between eighty seven and a thousand
c) Thousands
d) Millions
e) Billions
f) Trillions or more

It's OK to just guess, but if you want to use numbers, the unit of current is an ampere, which is a coulomb per second, and an electron has a charge of about
1.602176487(40)×10−19 coulombs.
trebejo
almarg's avatar
almarg
8,673 posts
 
06-11-11: Shadorne
Stereo speakers run on AC. AC is Alternating Current. Since we use Alternating Current there is no net transfer of electrons to the speaker. (Your speakers are NOT like a car battery that you would charge with DC)

Simply put, if your speakers were being charged and electrons were constantly building up inside them then eventually they would become highly charged like a battery.
Hi Shadorne,

Agreed. I don't think anyone has said anything inconsistent with this.

Best regards,
-- Al
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
14,147 posts
 
But the OP was not referring to the "transfer of electrons to the apeaker." Pretty sure that's what they call a Strawman Argument. LOL
bifwynne
2,069 posts
 
Hey Al, so . . . you agree with Bill (Audiofiel). What do you have against Carl Sagan (not bifwynne)???
shadorne's avatar
shadorne
7,333 posts
 
consider the number of electrons that move between the amp output poles and the speaker cables every second

The answer is still Zero. Alternating current has no net movement of electrons. Same as there is no net movement of air in your room when you listen to music.
almarg's avatar
almarg
8,673 posts
 
06-11-11: Bifwynne
Hey Al, so . . . you agree with Bill (Audiofiel). What do you have against Carl Sagan (not bifwynne)???
My apologies, Bruce. I should have given that response at least a nomination for second place. My wife has frequently quoted that same Carl Sagan expression, so I guess Bill's analysis struck me as more novel.

Best regards,
-- Al :-)
More to discover