The Connection Between Electric and Magnetic Constants Explained

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter PhDorBust
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Constant Electric
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the electric constant (ε₀) and magnetic constant (μ₀), exploring their physical significance, their relationship to the speed of light, and the implications of using rationalized units in physics. Participants examine the nature of these constants, their roles in equations, and the historical context of unit definitions.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that ε₀ and μ₀ are products of rationalized units and hold no physical significance, questioning how they relate to the speed of light.
  • Others propose that these constants have important effects in electrical circuits, as they relate to the impedance of free space and the speed of light, suggesting a deeper significance.
  • A participant expresses confusion about the derivation of these constants and their relationship to the speed of light, seeking clarity on the foundational aspects of these definitions.
  • There is a historical perspective shared regarding the sequence of unit definitions, with a participant noting that the definitions of units like the Newton and the meter are interconnected with the constants in question.
  • One participant challenges the notion of "physical significance," suggesting that the term may be subjective and not applicable in a strict physical context.
  • Concerns are raised about the implementation of rationalized factors in equations like Coulomb's law and their retrospective application after the formulation of Maxwell's equations.
  • Another participant questions the implications of setting constants to one, pondering whether this simplification could lead to absurd conclusions about the nature of resistance and the speed of light.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the physical significance of ε₀ and μ₀, with some asserting their lack of significance while others argue for their importance in practical applications. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these constants and their definitions.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the dependence of the discussion on the definitions of units and the historical context of their development, indicating that assumptions about the significance of these constants may vary based on individual perspectives.

PhDorBust
Messages
141
Reaction score
0
Both the electric constant and magnetic constant are the product of rationalized units and hold no physical significance.

How can they have no physical significance yet have such an elegant relation to the speed of light?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The constants εo Farads per meter and μo Henrys per meter are a consequence of selecting rationalized MKS units. But their units, Farads and Henrys per meter have important effects:

SQRT[μo/εo] = 377 ohms, the same "ohms" as a resistor, because capacitors and inductors store electric and magnetic fields, which are important in electric circuits.

SQRT[1/μoεo] = 2.9979 x 108 meters per second (speed of light).

Even if we set their values to 1, and revalue many fundamental constants (ohms, speed of light (meaning the meter if we hold the second fixed), amps, volts, Tesla, Farad, Newton (defined through the Lorentz force), etc., etc., their units will remain.

Bob S
 
Bob S said:
The constants εo Farads per meter and μo Henrys per meter are a consequence of selecting rationalized MKS units. But their units, Farads and Henrys per meter have important effects:

SQRT[μo/εo] = 377 ohms, the same "ohms" as a resistor, because capacitors and inductors store electric and magnetic fields, which are important in electric circuits.

SQRT[1/μoεo] = 2.9979 x 108 meters per second (speed of light).

Even if we set their values to 1, and revalue many fundamental constants (ohms, speed of light (meaning the meter if we hold the second fixed), amps, volts, Tesla, Farad, Newton (defined through the Lorentz force), etc., etc., their units will remain.

Bob S

I'm afraid I don't follow. I understand these electric and magnetic constants to simply be constants of proportionality from electric units to mechanical ones. And the attached constants like 1/4pi are merely for simplicity. This would be fine except for their relation to the speed of light. I understand that for the speed of light eqn, the units work out to m/s... but how do constants come to equal it?

What was derived from what?
 
PhDorBust said:
What was derived from what?
The second came first, followed by the cubit (then meter and the foot). Then kilogram (or it could have been a stone or a pound), then "g" and Newtons, then volt (from Volta cells), amp, then ohm, Gauss etc, etc.

Now (I believe) a Newton is defined as the force between two conductors each 1 meter long and x? cm apart and carrying 1 amp. We could set all the important constants to 1, but problems arise if we set the speed of light to 1, and not change the definition of a second, for example. We would have a nanometer stick in common usage (the speed of light is about 30 cm/nanosecond).

Bob S
 
PhDorBust said:
Both the electric constant and magnetic constant are the product of rationalized units and hold no physical significance.

How can they have no physical significance yet have such an elegant relation to the speed of light?

Hold on. As Bob was trying to explain it, I think, both mu0 and eplison0 have physical significance. We can use these values to calculate physically significant things like the speed of light in a vacuum and how electrical circuits will behave. Their exact values, in some given units, are the result of the way in which we people define things like distance and units of electric current.

If these humanly defined units have physical significance, so do the values of vacuum permeability and permissively.

What do you mean by physical significance?

Edit: I take it all back. Anyone who would talk to you about physics using the word 'significance' is not talking physics but gibberish where words are held in common but their meanings are ephemeral and moving targets, evolving with personal taste. The word 'significance' has no physical significance. :-d
 
Last edited:
It seems like these rationalized factors like 1/4pi for coulomb's law were implemented after the fact of Maxwell's equations so that the relation did exist elegantly?
 
PhDorBust said:
It seems like these rationalized factors like 1/4pi for coulomb's law were implemented after the fact of Maxwell's equations so that the relation did exist elegantly?

Wikipedia states that the electric constant describes no physical property and is simply a measurement-system constant. How does it describe the speed of light then?
 
PhDorBust said:
Wikipedia states that the electric constant describes no physical property and is simply a measurement-system constant. How does it describe the speed of light then?
In an earlier post I stated that the ratio of μo and εo had the units of ohms2, and the product had the units of velocity-2. Ohms of course are the basis for electrical engineering, and velocity for the speed of light. If μo and εo are simply constants, then if we set these constants to one (both their values and their units), can we then say that the resistance of a 1-ohm resistor equals the speed of light? This would make physics really simple, wouldn't it. Everybody could then claim to be a physicist.

Bob S
 

Similar threads

Undergrad What physical quantity has dimension [ML⁻³T⁻²] in electromagnetism?
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
Undergrad Transmission Line EM Wave vs EM Wave in Free Space
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
High School Seeing both B field lines and E field lines at the same time
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
Undergrad Current's Effect on Electrical Arcs
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
High School Questions about the Universe: Positive & negative fields and effects
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Undergrad Is this analogy between Magnetic Force and Gravitational Force accurate in helping to understand what contributes more to a stronger magnetic force?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Undergrad Electric Permittivity, Magnetic Permeability & Suceptibility
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Sticky
Insights Symmetry Arguments and the Infinite Wire with a Current
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
5K
Undergrad The vector math of relative motion of wire-loop & bar magnet
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Graduate Induced Electrical Field (Maxwell-Faraday's Law)
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K