Are density and resistivity proportional?

AI Thread Summary
Conductivity and resistivity are inversely proportional, meaning as one increases, the other decreases. The discussion clarifies that while density may influence conductivity through atomic concentration, it does not directly determine it. The relationship between conductivity and density is complex and not straightforward, as different metals can have the same density but vastly different conductivities. The original claim from the book about conductance depending on density may be a misinterpretation or mistranslation. Overall, the key takeaway is that conductivity and resistivity are fundamentally defined in relation to each other, independent of density.
Rushikesh Sarda
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Today while reading a book i read that conductance of a metal depends on its density. But it is also dependent on its resistivity. Does that mean that resistivity and conductivity are proportional to each other?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
And Also mention the relation between them
 
Conductivity is the inverse of resistivity. So they are inverse proportional. But this has nothing to do with density. It's just the definition.

I am afraid you may be quoting the book incorrectly, too. Where did you read this?
 
+1 to what Nasu said.

Silver is a better conductor than gold but gold is denser.
 
nasu said:
Conductivity is the inverse of resistivity. So they are inverse proportional. But this has nothing to do with density. It's just the definition.

I am afraid you may be quoting the book incorrectly, too. Where did you read this?

I read it in My Indian book of my 12th Class. It Says that conductance Depends On the "Density of the Metal." I'm not quoting that incorrectly . It is The same Thing Written In the Book.
 
It may be a miss-translation too. Is the original in English?
The conductance is a property of a given resistor whereas conductivity is a material property. Like we have resistance (for a given resistor) and resistivity (for a material).

The conductivity (material property) depends on the carrier concentration which indeed depends on the atom concentration. Density too depends on the atom concentration but also on the atomic mass. So the relationship is convoluted. And not very meaningful, as was shown by the example given above by CWatters. You can (in principle) have metals with the same density but with very different conductivities.
 
  • Like
Likes Rushikesh Sarda
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Dear all, in an encounter of an infamous claim by Gerlich and Tscheuschner that the Greenhouse effect is inconsistent with the 2nd law of thermodynamics I came to a simple thought experiment which I wanted to share with you to check my understanding and brush up my knowledge. The thought experiment I tried to calculate through is as follows. I have a sphere (1) with radius ##r##, acting like a black body at a temperature of exactly ##T_1 = 500 K##. With Stefan-Boltzmann you can calculate...
Thread 'Griffith, Electrodynamics, 4th Edition, Example 4.8. (First part)'
I am reading the Griffith, Electrodynamics book, 4th edition, Example 4.8 and stuck at some statements. It's little bit confused. > Example 4.8. Suppose the entire region below the plane ##z=0## in Fig. 4.28 is filled with uniform linear dielectric material of susceptibility ##\chi_e##. Calculate the force on a point charge ##q## situated a distance ##d## above the origin. Solution : The surface bound charge on the ##xy## plane is of opposite sign to ##q##, so the force will be...
Back
Top