is space a superconductor?

Question

a charged particle in motion creates an electromagnetic wave. (one property of light)
An electromagnetic wave passing through a conductor creates a charged particle to move through the conductor. (the other property of light).
Ergo since light has both properties mentioned and it moves through space, space must be a conductor.. and it's so cold as to offer zero resistance to light, it must be a superconductor.Right?

Answer 1

Wrong.

A charge in motion is, by definition, an electric current. But it doesn't necessarily generate an electromagnetic wave. That only happens if it's velocity vector (either speed or direction) changes.

An electromagnetic wave (more properly, the magnetic component, since the electric component cannot exist inside of a conductor) does *not* 'create' a charged particle within the conductor. A conductor has (by definition) free particles (usually electrons) that are not involved in the chemical bond(s) between the atoms of the material. As a result, there exists this 'sea' of available charge carriers and the material is a 'conductor'.

Materials in which all of the electrons are 'tied up' in chemical bonds are called 'insulators'.

Free space can be a conductor in the sense that charged particles are free to move through it under the influence of both electric and magnetic fields. But it isn't a conductor in the usual sense of the word. There has to be some source of charged particles for current to flow.

OTOH a charged particle moving in free space will, as per Newtons First Law of motion, continue to move in the same direction forever (or until it meets some force that causes its path to change or 'captures' it some way) so I suppose, in that sense, it might be thought of as a 'superconductor'.

But it's not really the same thing as what's usually meant by a 'superconductor'. In a true superconductor the atomic structure is such that the charged particles (usually electrons) have a clear 'channel' between the atoms of the material. It's the effect of electrons running into atoms and transfering some of their energy to them that leads to the phenomenon of 'resistance'. The energy lost by the electron (that is, transfered to an atom during a collision) comes out as heat.


Doug

Answer 2

I believe the word "superconductor" has been coined in a different context - electrical engineering only.
Every electrical conductor, no matter how good (copper, gold), still has a certain amount of electrical restistance (measured in Ohm). This creates all kinds of problems in electrical engineering, and the search for the "superconductor" i.e. ideally zero resistance began.
To see what is presently understood as a superconductor, see
http://www.superconductors.org/
Electrically, space is an insulator, not a conductor at all.
Otherwise all those satellites and space ships out there would "shorten" each others signal out.

Answer 3

Space..if you think of it in the sense that is is nothing....and you look at the formula for temperature...T=e/m m=mass and e=energy then there is no mass in space. There is obviously energy(light) but as we know anything divided by 0 is undefined. Therefore space has no temperature. Therefore is is not a superconductor. Although because light only travels at the speed of light...not faster or slower...it doesn't really matter.

One reason we don't ko wthe temperature of space is because if you stick a thermometer out there then you are adding mass and energy...and that adds bias to the above formula and argument.

Answer 4

accelerated charged particles create a wave

Answer 5

you're properly, flora improve faraway from gravity and in route of gentle. without gravity, the seeds will likely not comprehend which thanks to commence turning out to be, and maximum likely die. i assume seeds ought to get fortunate and improve the right way. in case you've already got a plant, the gravity received't remember as a lot as gentle does,so it will improve in route of gentle.