Comments by "Pete Venuti" (@petevenuti7355) on "How Electricity Actually Works" video.

impedance and reluctance! you can't use the speed of light in a vacuum because you're not in a vacuum!!! it's going to be less then the speed of light.... never mind all the novice questions! also does the time to react if your light filament but never mind.... still I give you credit for everything you added, but I still think you left an ambiguous in the first place as a form of clickbait.
1
@jmodified if he can be picky enough over a blip a few orders of magnitude smaller in time sooner, I'll go a few more orders smaller in time then that, just later. Since you know these things, how much slower through the bare wire would you estimate? It's my understanding if it were 50ohm coax it would be ~.7c, is that correct?
1
@jmodified I define in the order of magnitude as a multiple of 10 so a fraction of a percent would be about three multiples, and three I define as a few, i.e. between two and several... I have noticed that the definition of terms like few and several and order of magnitude tend to be pretty flexible....
1
@jmodified thanks for the other info, the 70% number I was using was for the coax was a rule of thumb I used to use for the specific cables I used with my antennas, I didn't realize it had such a wide range when the same impedance, explains why trying using old cables as spare 'leaky' antennas never worked too well(that's when you damage the shielding on purpose at regular intervals to create a sort of phased array)... I know , very ghetto wireless, I also used to nail rebar to trees in the woods for beneficial Fresnel effects 😒 Anyway, if I'm going to quibble over a fraction of a percent difference, and there is approximately 10% difference from c in speed through the wire just between the inside and outside of the switch before it gets to the air and the inside and outside of the light source, might be comparable to the difference in speed through air at those relative scales.
1
@jmodified okay I guess since I'm quibbling over such trivial amounts .9997 you got to move the decimal over four places so that's more like several than a few.... But like I stated before most people are pretty flexible with those terms... You could always round .7 up to one to say a few is closer to right then several... But then we'll be talking semantics for the rest of the year... Close enough
1
@jmodified to see negligible differences I'm talking about, I don't think their test equipment could even get that accurate, could it? I still think alpha Phoenix did the best job saying most of the same stuff he did in this follow-up video, and I still think veritassium was very clickbaity using ambiguity to start an argument in his first video. I believe that was planned.
1