A question on Electromagnetic theory

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Shan K
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Electromagnetic Theory
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the derivation of the wave equation for the electric field in a conducting medium, specifically addressing the conditions under which the free charge density (ρfree) is considered to be zero while maintaining a non-zero conductivity (σ). Participants explore the implications of these assumptions in the context of electromagnetic theory.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the assumption that ρfree can be zero if σ is non-zero, arguing that a non-zero conductivity implies the presence of free charge carriers.
  • Another participant suggests that within conductors, free charge carriers accumulate on the surface, leading to an interior charge density of zero.
  • Some participants propose that in a perfect conductor, all free charges reside on the surface, while finite conductivity allows for current within the material.
  • There is a discussion about the relationship between free charge density and surface charge density, with some suggesting that σ may refer to surface charge density rather than conductivity.
  • One participant explains that it is possible to have zero free charge density if the positive and negative charge densities are equal, as seen in metals and plasmas.
  • Another participant references Griffith's introduction to electrodynamics, explaining that the continuity equation leads to the conclusion that free charge density dissipates quickly in conductors.
  • Concerns are raised about whether free electrons contribute to ρfree, with some arguing that they move to the surface and thus do not contribute to a volume density.
  • Participants discuss the implications of Gauss's law, stating that if free charge densities existed within the conductor, they would create an electric field, leading to a cancellation of those charges.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between free charge density and conductivity, with no consensus reached on whether ρfree can be assumed to be zero in the presence of non-zero conductivity. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these assumptions.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of defining volume charge density in the context of surface phenomena in conductors, as well as the assumptions made regarding the behavior of charge carriers in different scenarios.

Shan K
Messages
73
Reaction score
0
Hi,
In EM theory to derive the 'wave equation for electric field in a conducting medium' we make ρfree to be zero, but we still use σ to be nonzero.
My question is why we are doing this ?
σ denotes the conductivity of the material and a material can not conduct if it has no free carriers.
So a non zero σ always implies a non zero free carrier. And ρfree is defined to be the charge density which does not take part in polarization, like the free carriers in the metal.
Thank You
 
Physics news on Phys.org
i'm still learning e&m myself. but to my knowledge, within conductors, the free charge carriers end up on the outside of the conductor making ρinside=0. but ρinside is essentially ρfree since ρ refers to a volume charge density.

i may very well be mistaken, but based on the context, I'm going to assume that σ should not be the conductivity; i think the σ in whatever you were looking at was referring to the surface charge density. if it is a conductor we are dealing with, then i don't think σfree should be zero since, if I'm not mistaken, conduction happens to be surface phenomenon simply due to the fact that free charges end up on a conductor's surface to minimize the energy of the charge configuration.
 
In a perfect conductor, all free charges are on the surface. With finite conductivity, signa, there is a current inside the material with j=sigma E.
 
iScience said:
i may very well be mistaken, but based on the context, I'm going to assume that σ should not be the conductivity; i think the σ in whatever you were looking at was referring to the surface charge density. if it is a conductor we are dealing with, then i don't think σfree should be zero since, if I'm not mistaken, conduction happens to be surface phenomenon simply due to the fact that free charges end up on a conductor's surface to minimize the energy of the charge configuration.

σ is the conductivity of the material. It is related to the current density by j=σE.
Where j is the conduction current density inside the material, and E is the applied electric field.
 
clem said:
In a perfect conductor, all free charges are on the surface. With finite conductivity, signa, there is a current inside the material with j=sigma E.

So why we are assuming ρfree to be zero for conductors?
 
σ is the conductivity of the material. It is related to the current density by j=σE.
Where j is the conduction current density inside the material, and E is the applied electric field.

well adapt the equation to the problem's dimension: use K (surface current density) instead of J (volume current density)
 
iScience said:
well adapt the equation to the problem's dimension: use K (surface current density) instead of J (volume current density)
It is correct as far as I know. I think you are taking about the equation K=σv, where σ is the surface charge density.
 
Because there is no free charge density in the conductors... all the free charges move on the surface.
Otherwise, if you had free charge densities, you'd need to have electric field within the conductor, which is not the case.
 
Shan K said:
So why we are assuming ρfree to be zero for conductors?

It is possible to have a finite (even very large) conductivity but have rho = 0. Since you have two charge carriers, all that is needed is that the charge densities of the positive and negative charge carriers are equal. In a metal, for example, if the charge density of the electrons is equal to the background charge density of the positive ions, then rho = 0. Similarly, a plasma can have very high conductivity, but zero charge density. The ideal equations of magnetohydrodynamics basically assume that the charge density of the plasma is zero and the conductivity of the plasma is infinite. The two charge carriers move in opposite directions to support the current flow.
 
  • #10
phyzguy said:
In a metal, for example, if the charge density of the electrons is equal to the background charge density of the positive ions, then rho = 0.
Are this rho and ρfree equal?
Do the stationary ions contribute in ρfree?
 
  • #11
Do you know what is \rho_{free}?
 
  • #12
ChrisVer said:
Do you know what is \rho_{free}?
Yaa, ρfree is the free charge carrier. They do not contribute in the polarization of a material. They contribute to the free current density.
 
  • #13
So if you look at Griffith's introduction to electrodynamics, there is a good reasoning why you put \rho_{free}=0
The main idea is that the continuity equation for a conductor is written as:
\dot{\rho}_{free}= -\frac{\sigma}{\epsilon} \rho_{free}
The solution of this is:
\rho_{free}(t)= e^{-(\frac{\sigma}{\epsilon})t} \rho(0)
So if you add in the conductor some initial free charge \rho(0), it dissipates in a characteristic time \tau=\frac{\sigma}{\epsilon}
For a conductor the \sigma is large or taken infinite... thus the free charge disappears very fast (it goes on the edges/surface of the conductor). So there is no mistake to take that it's zero (it becomes zero instanteously) or you can just wait for it to become zero...
 
  • #14
ChrisVer said:
So if you look at Griffith's introduction to electrodynamics, there is a good reasoning why you put \rho_{free}=0
The main idea is that the continuity equation for a conductor is written as:
\dot{\rho}_{free}= -\frac{\sigma}{\epsilon} \rho_{free}
The solution of this is:
\rho_{free}(t)= e^{-(\frac{\sigma}{\epsilon})t} \rho(0)
So if you add in the conductor some initial free charge \rho(0), it dissipates in a characteristic time \tau=\frac{\sigma}{\epsilon}
For a conductor the \sigma is large or taken infinite... thus the free charge disappears very fast (it goes on the edges/surface of the conductor). So there is no mistake to take that it's zero (it becomes zero instanteously) or you can just wait for it to become zero...

But what about the free electrons present in the conductor will they not contribute to the ρfree. So as long as free electrons are present how can we make ρfree = 0
 
  • #15
They all go on the surface...
 
  • #16
Also about your ions question, the deal is that ions don't move... But you can see the absence of an electron as a moving positive charge towards the other way (hole)...
 
  • #17
ChrisVer said:
They all go on the surface...
Yaa, but they don't leave the conductor. So as a whole the conductor should have ρfree, may be on the surface of the conductor, isn't it ?
 
  • #18
and how are you supposed to define a volume density \rho for something that only exists on a surface?
Inside the conductor, there are no free charge densities, otherwise they would create an electric field. Then because of that electric field, the charges would again move so that they would immediately cancel it.
Then Gauss's law will again give you 0 free charge densities
Conductors as a whole, yes, they can have a charge...
 
  • #19
ChrisVer said:
and how are you supposed to define a volume density \rho for something that only exists on a surface?
Inside the conductor, there are no free charge densities, otherwise they would create an electric field. Then because of that electric field, the charges would again move so that they would immediately cancel it.
Then Gauss's law will again give you 0 free charge densities
Conductors as a whole, yes, they can have a charge...
Great, many many thanks to you friend. I have got it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
977
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K