An attempt at a detailed analysis of the phenomenon.

We have not yet fully explained the Peltier effect, which is “opposite” to Seebeck effect, but it seems to me that glimpses are flickering.

The Seebeck effect is that if we fuse three wires made of two different metals (one in the middle and the other on both sides), then if one junction is cooled and the other is heated, we can detect a very small electric potential difference at the ends of this pair (called a “thermoelectric pair”).

It is clear that this electrical potential difference is caused by the displacement of the “cloud” of free electrons from the hot junction to the cold junction.

What causes free electrons to move by THEMSELVES from a heated metal section to a cold one?

THE SPEED OF ELECTRONS DOES NOT DEPEND ON TEMPERATURE!

That is, they continue to move at the same speeds of the so-called “zero energy” (the energy they had in metal cooled to almost Absolute zero!!)

And they DON’T GET “hot”, that is, they do not move faster!

According to the Configurational Theory of Electronic Orbits, thermal energy (at least in metals, although I think it applies to ANY atomic and molecular systems) is NOT the kinetic energy of motion of atoms and molecules, but the POTENTIAL ENERGY of deformation of electronic orbits. The orbits shift relative to each other, and their diameter increases as the temperature increases, but all this is NOT the kinetic energy of the accelerated translational motion of atoms and molecules, but the potential energy of “reconfiguring” their electronic orbits.

So, the heating of a metal means the mentioned deformation of the electronic orbits of its atoms. The orbits, expanding, increase their mutual overlap, which naturally increases the number of free electrons. That is, when the metal is heated, the concentration of electrons increases. And this, in turn, generates an increase in the Coulomb forces of mutual repulsion of electrons, WHICH CAUSES them to move into the cold zone, where the concentration of electrons is lower, which means their “Coulomb pressure” is LOWER!

But!!!

Since the electrical and thermal conductivity of metals is precisely related to the CONCENTRATION of ELECTRONS, and the higher it is, the better the electrical and thermal conductivity, HOW can we explain the well-known fact of an INCREASE in their ELECTRICAL RESISTANCE with temperature, that is, a DECREASE in electrical conductivity!? This clearly contradicts both the assumption just made about an increase in the concentration of free electrons during heating and the well-known fact that electrical conductivity is related to the concentration of free electrons!

(I repeat the well-known truth: The electrical conductivity of metals is related to the presence of free electrons in them, that is, electrons that can move freely over any distance and in any direction in the metal. And the higher their concentration, the greater the electrical conductivity. It is the greatest in the best conductors – silver, copper and gold!)

Answer: This means that the heating process causes an increase in two competing ANTAGONISTIC processes in the metal: one that increases the concentration of electrons and thereby contributes to an increase in electrical conductivity, and the other, an opposing process, a decrease in electrical conductivity that PREVAILS OVER the FIRST.

The increase in the ratio of thermal conductivity to electrical conductivity mentioned in the previous note “Cause instead of effect, effect instead of cause” indicates these antagonistic processes.

So, what is this process that reduces conductivity when heated?

(I don’t even want to repeat one single and ridiculous phrase from the FED – Physical Encyclopedic Dictionary, Volume 5, Article “Electrical resistance”. But I will overcome my dislike for the shameful nonsense of REPUTABLE ACADEMIC PUBLICATIONS and quote this GENERALLY ACCEPTED “truth” IN PHYSICS:

“In the case of metals, electrical resistance is due to the fact that the crystal lattice of metals is distorted by thermal fluctuations and structural inhomogeneities (impurity atoms, lattice defects) on which electrons are scattered.”

I’ve written about this nonsense many times, and I don’t want to repeat myself by quoting myself. But again, I overcome this reluctance in order not to chase readers through links.

I can’t help but mention the most elementary thing: The drift velocity of the electron cloud at the maximum technically permissible current density in a copper wire is one ampere per square millimeter of cross-section = 0.4 mm/sec!) At a higher drift speed, the wire will simply overheat and melt!

Chaotic speeds of movement of the same free electrons in a metal is 600-2000 km/sec!!!! Two hundred and fifty million times more. And since “SCATTERING” is about COLLISIONS of electrons with these “defects,” it is necessary to take not the velocity, but the kinetic energy of the electrons, and it is already 6.25 TRILLION times greater than the energy of the current electrons creeping slowly. If the above-mentioned GENERALLY ACCEPTED “explanation” of SCATTERING is accepted as true, any piece of metal should instantly explode by itself with the power of an atomic or hydrogen bomb. But for some reason, nature does not take into account Physical Encyclopedias, and although there are plenty of metals around us, nothing explodes by itself, destroying both the Earth and the entire solar system!

Nature is a fool, she doesn’t read clever Physics Encyclopedias!)

One hypothesis that I have long proposed suggests that the so-called “Cooper pairs” of electrons that cause the superconductivity of a number of metals in cryotemperatures are formed not only at low temperatures, but ALWAYS AT ANY TEMPERATURE, but their number strongly depends on the temperature of the metal. At very low temperatures, in conditions. “suitable” for the formation of “ideal atoms”, that is, atoms with orbits UNDEFORMED by HEAT, the probability of the formation and long-term existence of such pairs is high and comes with a kind of quantum leap. Superconductivity!

As the temperature increases, the process of the pairs formation also abruptly decreases (due to the resulting thermal deformation of the electron orbits). However, it also exists at “room” temperatures and makes its contribution to INCREASING ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY. But the higher the temperature, the fewer such pairs are “born and survive”, and this immediately affects the decrease in electrical conductivity, which HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH the INCREASE IN THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY caused by a completely different process.

Another assumption, causally related to the previous one, is also the explanation I have long given for such a phenomenon as “electrical resistance of metals.”

Namely, discarding the absolutely ridiculous CONVENTIONAL pseudo-explanation of resistance just mentioned by “scattering of free electrons on inhomogeneities of the crystal lattice of impurity or thermal origin,” the idea of MAGNETIC coupling of spin magnetic moments of electrons with the magnetic fields of the lattice atoms is proposed. That is why “Cooper pairs”, having a total spin magnetic moment of ZERO, can move in a metal WITHOUT the SLIGHTEST RESISTANCE. They “DON’T MAGNETICALLY LOCK ONTO ANYTHING”!

When a metal is heated, the orbits of atomic electrons deform, and at the same time the coupling of their magnetic fields with the spin magnetic moments of free electrons increases, which leads to an increase in the total electrical resistance, without at all reducing the thermal conductivity associated with these deformations, and even, quite possibly, increasing it!

(The “exotic” enormous thermal conductivity of superfluid helium 2 is obviously related to the special behavior of the conglomerate of “Cooper” pairs of “ideal atoms” and we will not discuss this interesting topic here, although, as can be seen from the mention of the “ideal atom”, it could not do without it.)

There are two types of “coupling” of spin magnetic moments of free electrons with the magnetic fields of atomic orbital fields: Deforming orbits of “coupling” – that is, communicating the thermal potential energy of altered orbits to atoms, and, conversely, “coupling”, “repairing” orbits, returning them to the state of an “ideal atom” with “correct”, not distorted, non – degenerate orbits – that is , the taking away of thermal potential energy – the cooling of atoms . An ideal atom has nothing to do with the generally accepted states of an atom that is “excited” or “in a normal state” – in both cases, we are not talking about the “ideal” state of electronic orbits, as in the case when no additional orbit influences act on the atom.

Let’s return to the Peltier effect.

As already mentioned, the spins of free electrons moving in an orderly manner under the influence of an applied electric field, that is, slowly drifting along a conductor, are no longer directed chaotically, but experience, one might say, circular polarization, like the arrows of compasses located in a plane perpendicular to a direct current conductor. Obviously, during the transition of this cloud from one crystal lattice to another (we are talking about the junction of two different metals), the spins also experience some additional change in direction, making them capable of a stronger influence on the state of atomic orbits, both deforming and “straightening”, that is, returning them to the ideal atom. state

In a narrow strip of junction of two different metals, their crystal lattices turn the spins of electros with their fields, which already have a certain ordered orientation due to the magnetic field of the current, so that they can or deform the orbits more than usual, and this leads to heating of this part of the junction. In another junction, the opposite happens, the directed spins of the electrons “correct” the deformed orbits, and cooling occurs here.

But this heat pump effect is especially strongly observed in semiconductors.

Most likely, it is not electrons with chaotically directed spins that are ejected from semiconductors, but POLARIZED electrons, which, due to this specific polarization of their spins, and hence magnetic moments, CAN “correct” the deformed “warm” orbits of atoms and make them “IDEAL”, which causes COOLING of the JUNCTION of two semiconductors.

And the last question is, HOW exactly do “polarized” electrons “correct deformed”orbits to “approaching ideal”, or, say, “a little closer to ideal”?

Answer: I DON’T KNOW!

I can only assume that the “polarized” electron “settles” into a certain orbit in the atom and its “parameters” are better suited to the atom than the previous «tenant”. Then that tenant is ejected from the atom, from this orbit, and he either becomes free altogether or moves to some adjacent orbit, for which he is also “good.” But the newcomer electron is already CHANGING the acquired orbit with its parameters in the direction of its greater idealization – COOLING the entire atom! And any cooling is an approximation to the state of the “ideal atom”!

And where does the excess energy go? Is it being carried away by electron drift?

No!

It is given to adjacent atoms and thus moves along the chain to the hot end of the thermocouple, through which the current flows. THE CURRENT ITSELF DOES NOT TRANSFER ANY HEAT, but only creates specific conditions for some junction atoms to heat up more than the usual Joule heat, and for others to turn into slightly more ideal ones and cool down!

Indeed, in the Peltier Joule effect, heat from the current is released everywhere, including the COOLING junction.

Faciant meliora potentes.

If I’m wrong, let my seniors correct me.

12 – 14 XI 2025