Quote from
I know a man who hates ‘current flow’, he insists that ‘charge flow’ should be used instead. As ‘current flow’ = charge flow flow!.
Very pedantic indeed
I am the man that the above responder is referring to. If I were Lord Byron, the famous English poet, I would use my poetic license and write something like "The sparkling stream flowed through the green meadow." That sentence might sound nice, but grammatically it is redundant and ridiculous. The word "stream" already implies water flow, and water does not flow twice. A land surveyor should say 'a stream exists within this meadow."
Similarly, you should say "current exists", "current is present", "charge flow", but not "current flow" because current already means charge flow.
Let me burst another bubble. R=V/I is NOT Ohm/s law. That relationship expressed by that equation is the definition of resistance and a definition is not a scientific law. Ohm's law is a PROPERTY of a material with respect to its linearity of current though it versus voltage across it. Tungsten wire obey Ohm's law, but a junction diode does not. Before you call me a kook, keep in mind I can back up what I say with three reputable physics textbooks. Ratch