This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Space charge article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
We need to disambiguate EMF, but I'm not into EE encough to know in this case whether it should point to electromagnetic field or Electromotive force. Someone please help. - Anthropos 13:06, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)
It appears from the context that it should point to electromotive force, so I've changed it from the automated disambiguation.
Also, I've wikified Krishnavedala's contributions a bit. I've unlinked Image:Childlaw.JPG, which seems to me that it should be removed; I have no idea how to go about this. I think I've translated it to TeX properly, but the image was rather ambiguous. I can't say anything on the accuracy or relevance of what Krishnavedala has added; I'm only a sophomore physics major looking for stuff to clean up. If anyone can improve this section, please do so. 24.118.220.84 02:10, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
--
Krishnavedala image Childlaw.JPG
ChildLangmuirLawGraph1.svg
"I can't say anything on the accuracy or relevance of what Krishnavedala has added"
As far as I can tell, the Child's Law image ChildLangmuirLawGraph1.svg is just wrong. It appears to plot V^3, not V^(3/2) or V^1.5.
Unless somebody objects, I will post a graph of V^1.5.
PRR (
talk) 23:10, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
I added definitions of the variables in the equation for Child's law.
--Geoff
I wonder what the definition for ν is —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.238.185.224 ( talk) 19:25, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
It is clear that the relation given in the section 'Mott's limited steady-state..' has anything to do with Mott? Can anyone give a reference for this? This expression already appeared in early papers by Shockley (see e.g. W. Shockley and R. C. Prim, Phys. Rev. 90, 753 - 758 (1953), Eq.(1.13)). Chucklapuck ( talk) 19:44, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
It is also known as Mott-Gurney-Law (Space-charge Limited Current, SCLC). Hear the Cilds-Law is refered to as SCLC? But isn't SCLC ? Makes no sense... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.176.79.30 ( talk) 16:14, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
"If the "vacuum" has a pressure of 10-6 mmHg or less, the main vehicle of conduction is electrons." this exposes only high vacuum conditions. what if I have a plasma within a gas at a pressure of, say, 15 to 40 torr? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.233.186.4 ( talk) 06:20, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for pointing out the error. The graph of Child's Law is now rectified. --ElectroKid 17:23, 22 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krishnavedala ( talk • contribs)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Space charge article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
We need to disambiguate EMF, but I'm not into EE encough to know in this case whether it should point to electromagnetic field or Electromotive force. Someone please help. - Anthropos 13:06, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)
It appears from the context that it should point to electromotive force, so I've changed it from the automated disambiguation.
Also, I've wikified Krishnavedala's contributions a bit. I've unlinked Image:Childlaw.JPG, which seems to me that it should be removed; I have no idea how to go about this. I think I've translated it to TeX properly, but the image was rather ambiguous. I can't say anything on the accuracy or relevance of what Krishnavedala has added; I'm only a sophomore physics major looking for stuff to clean up. If anyone can improve this section, please do so. 24.118.220.84 02:10, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
--
Krishnavedala image Childlaw.JPG
ChildLangmuirLawGraph1.svg
"I can't say anything on the accuracy or relevance of what Krishnavedala has added"
As far as I can tell, the Child's Law image ChildLangmuirLawGraph1.svg is just wrong. It appears to plot V^3, not V^(3/2) or V^1.5.
Unless somebody objects, I will post a graph of V^1.5.
PRR (
talk) 23:10, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
I added definitions of the variables in the equation for Child's law.
--Geoff
I wonder what the definition for ν is —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.238.185.224 ( talk) 19:25, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
It is clear that the relation given in the section 'Mott's limited steady-state..' has anything to do with Mott? Can anyone give a reference for this? This expression already appeared in early papers by Shockley (see e.g. W. Shockley and R. C. Prim, Phys. Rev. 90, 753 - 758 (1953), Eq.(1.13)). Chucklapuck ( talk) 19:44, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
It is also known as Mott-Gurney-Law (Space-charge Limited Current, SCLC). Hear the Cilds-Law is refered to as SCLC? But isn't SCLC ? Makes no sense... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.176.79.30 ( talk) 16:14, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
"If the "vacuum" has a pressure of 10-6 mmHg or less, the main vehicle of conduction is electrons." this exposes only high vacuum conditions. what if I have a plasma within a gas at a pressure of, say, 15 to 40 torr? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.233.186.4 ( talk) 06:20, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for pointing out the error. The graph of Child's Law is now rectified. --ElectroKid 17:23, 22 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krishnavedala ( talk • contribs)