The high resistance piece of wire in incandescent light bulbs glows as a result of electrons incoming through a low resistance material being squeezed through (bombard electrons that don’t want to be moved in) the high resistance material with a certain pressure (voltage). We are using the high resistance material to usurp (convert into heat and then into light) the kinetic energy of the electrons in the low resistance material (commonly copper wire).
We do the same thing with electrical heating elements and microphones.
Are we also doing this in electrical appliances from which we don’t expect a certain “end product” (heat, light, sound)? For instance, computers. When we were still using actual physical relays to build logic gates, I can imaging electron flow being converted into the energy (eletrco magnetism?) required to actuate/move the switch inside the relay. But what about today’s transistors? The processing units inside CPUs and GPUs heat up, but that’s a side effect of something I don’t understand. We are not trying to reap that heat. We are after manipulating groups transistors into expressing boolean logic by either giving them a voltage or not.
I know very little of electricity, so please do correct any incorrect assumptions! I’m very eager to learn! 😊💡
I mean, to be fair the water pipe analogy is pretty good as the pressure performs work done per unit volume, and voltage is work done per unit charge which takes up a specific volume of the wire.
But you’re right, with A.C. that analogy gets complicated unless supposedly you had water going back and forth in the pipe, but that is still transmitting energy like a wave does.
like any good model it has it’s scope. inductivity and capacity are out of scope. electrical current is not electrons pushing each other as a longitudinal wave in water could make it wiggle in a pipe. as soon as something stops to make sense in the model we need a new model.
I always see analogies as effective at their chosen level of resolution (similar to your scale).
At dinner-table-conversation level, or 5 year old kid level, these water analogies work.
If you need to actually produce something, they’re completely useless.
But for most stuff/people, Newtonian analogies work surprisingly well, so long as we always qualify it with “remember, this isn’t actually how it works, this is just an analogy to get you closer to how it works”.