Conductors without real world particles

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around whether conductors must be conceptualized in terms of real-world particles, specifically protons and electrons, or if they can be understood as continuous charge distributions. The scope includes theoretical considerations and conceptual clarifications related to electrical conductivity and charge carriers.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that charged objects can be viewed as continuous charge distributions without referencing real-world particles, which they find simpler to understand.
  • Others argue that electrons are the primary charge carriers in conductors, with protons being less common in certain contexts like semiconductor physics.
  • A participant questions the feasibility of considering continuous charge distributions if conductors are made of a finite number of particles, suggesting that true continuity may not be possible.
  • Another participant notes that currents are often treated using continuous current density and charge density, which simplifies the analysis compared to considering individual particles.
  • One participant highlights that Maxwell's equations already incorporate continuous charge distributions and current flow, implying that the question of particle representation may be puzzling.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether conductors should be conceptualized in terms of real-world particles or as continuous distributions. No consensus is reached, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

The discussion touches on the limitations of modeling conductors as continuous entities versus discrete particles, but does not resolve the implications of these modeling choices.

FS98
Messages
105
Reaction score
4
do conductors have to be thought of in terms of protons and electrons?

We can think of charged objects as continuous charge distributions for example without reference to any sort of real world particles. This is much simpler to grasp for me.

Is the same sort of thing done for conductors, or must we think of them in terms of real world particles?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
FS98 said:
We can think of charged objects as continuous charge distributions for example without reference to any sort of real world particles.

electrons ARE the charge carriers ( and in some less common cases the protons ... semiconductor physics)

FS98 said:
Is the same sort of thing done for conductors, or must we think of them in terms of real world particles?

I don't of how we couldn't consider that as the case
 
davenn said:
electrons ARE the charge carriers ( and in some less common cases the protons ... semiconductor physics)
I don't of how we couldn't consider that as the case
But when we think of continuous charge distributions we aren’t thinking of electrons. If something was made of a finite number of particles it couldn’t really be continuous could it be ?
 
FS98 said:
But when we think of continuous charge distributions we aren’t thinking of electrons. If something was made of a finite number of particles it couldn’t really be continuous could it be ?
of course it is ... I have a piece of copper wire in my hand ... it has a finite length, diameter, number of atoms of protons and electrons
 
Currents are often dealt with in terms of a continuous current density ##\vec J##, just like we often use a continuous charge density ##\rho##. It's easier than dealing with a bazillion point particles moving with some average velocity ##\vec v##.

Look up Maxwell's equations if you haven't seen them already. They're written in terms of continuous ##\vec J## and ##\rho##. When we want to deal with point particles, we express ##\rho## using Dirac delta functions.
 
FS98 said:
do conductors have to be thought of in terms of protons and electrons?

We can think of charged objects as continuous charge distributions for example without reference to any sort of real world particles. This is much simpler to grasp for me.

Is the same sort of thing done for conductors, or must we think of them in terms of real world particles?

This is a very odd and puzzling question, considering that Maxwell equations already deal with continuous charge distribution and continuous current flow.

Zz.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K