Conductors without real world particles

In summary, conductors can be thought of in terms of continuous charge distributions, without necessarily considering real world particles such as protons and electrons. This approach is often used in dealing with currents and is reflected in Maxwell's equations.
  • #1
FS98
105
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
  • #2
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
 
  • #3
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 ?
 
  • #4
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
 
  • #5
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.
 
  • #6
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 Vanadium 50

1. What are conductors without real world particles?

Conductors without real world particles are materials that do not contain any free electrons or ions, but still have the ability to conduct electricity.

2. How do conductors without real world particles conduct electricity?

These materials conduct electricity through the movement of lattice vibrations or phonons, rather than the movement of free electrons or ions.

3. What are some examples of conductors without real world particles?

Graphene, diamond, and certain types of ceramics are all examples of conductors without real world particles.

4. Are conductors without real world particles as efficient as traditional conductors?

In some cases, conductors without real world particles can be more efficient than traditional conductors, as they have fewer impurities and defects that can hinder the flow of electricity.

5. What are the potential applications of conductors without real world particles?

Conductors without real world particles have the potential to be used in advanced electronic devices, such as faster and more efficient transistors and sensors.

Similar threads

  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
7
Views
935
Replies
46
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
858
Replies
4
Views
858
Back
Top