A question on Electromagnetic theory

AI Thread Summary
In electromagnetic theory, the assumption of zero free charge density (ρfree) in conductors is based on the behavior of free charge carriers, which tend to migrate to the surface, resulting in no net charge density inside the conductor. While conductivity (σ) is non-zero, indicating the presence of free carriers, the rapid movement of these charges to the surface minimizes the internal electric field, leading to ρfree effectively becoming zero. This is supported by the continuity equation, which shows that any initial free charge dissipates quickly due to the high conductivity of the material. The discussion clarifies that while free electrons exist, they do not contribute to ρfree within the conductor's volume, as they are concentrated on the surface. Overall, the concept hinges on the principle that any internal charge density would create an electric field that would cause charges to redistribute, maintaining ρfree at zero.
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.
 
Back
Top