Does High Permittivity Imply High Conductivity in Materials?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DeltaX
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Electromagnetic
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between permittivity and conductivity in materials, alongside various electromagnetics questions related to energy density, charge configurations, and field measurements. Participants explore theoretical concepts and practical implications within the context of electromagnetics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that a material with high permittivity may not necessarily have high conductivity, suggesting that high permittivity is often associated with insulators, which typically have low conductivity.
  • Others argue that the relationship between permittivity and conductivity is not straightforward, with some suggesting that high permittivity materials can still exhibit variable conductivity depending on impurities, as seen in water.
  • One participant questions the energy required to construct different charge configurations, suggesting that a solid sphere of charge may require more energy than a hollow sphere, while others challenge this view and seek clarification on energy density concepts.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of using a weightless point charge to measure electric and magnetic fields, with some participants questioning the feasibility of such a scenario and the assumptions involved.
  • Some participants emphasize the need for a good dielectric to be a poor conductor, while others highlight the necessity of free-moving charges for high conductivity materials.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the relationship between permittivity and conductivity, as well as differing interpretations of energy density in charge configurations. The discussion remains unresolved with no clear consensus on these topics.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various assumptions and definitions related to permittivity, conductivity, and energy density, which may not be universally agreed upon. The discussion also touches on the implications of idealized scenarios, such as a weightless point charge, which may not reflect practical realities.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and professionals in physics and engineering, particularly those focused on electromagnetics, materials science, and theoretical concepts in charge interactions.

DeltaX
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Electromagnetic Questions :)

Hello everybody.

I have some questions that puzzled me in Electromagnetics. I tried to answer them all , some my answers make sene some not. I hope someone hear can help .


Q)If a material has a large permittivity, with it also follow that it will have a large conductivity ? Why or Why not ?

A)If the permittivity constant is larger since J=sigma.E so sigma=J/E so, If E is large then sigma will be large also.

I think this is wrong too.



Q)Which takes more energy to construct: a solid, uniform sphere of charge or a hollow uniform spherical shell with the same diamter and charge ? Why ? (think in terms of Energy density)

A) In terms of density a hollow uniformly sphere of charge will take more energy to construct. I
think becasue it has longer charge density than the solid sphere. the charge in the solid sphere is spread out within the solid spheere (more space for the charge) which will be less charge density, the charge will be more compacted and highly dense in hollow sphere, becasue of less room for charge to (spread out)

My answer is wrong, I think I need to think in terms of Energy Density=1/2 DE , becasue my professor said its not the hollow.



Q) You have been placed in a room with a weightless point charge ans sensitive measuring devices. How could you use this charge to determine E and B fields at an arbitrary point in the room ?

A)With a test point charge I Wouild begin with Lorentz Force Law which states: F=Q(E+u x B)

Determine E: Since E=Fe/Q I would measure the force on Q(the test charge) This measurement would yield E.
Determine B: Since Fm=Qu x B I Would be looking at Q still, but this time I would more it at a velocity (u) and measure the force that is acting upon test charge (Q). B will be yielded operationally by undoing the cross product(how?) . What velocity should I choose ?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
-1- Permittivity is usually largest for insulators. You get higher permittivity by having constrained electric dipoles in the material. Water has a high permittivity, and variable conductivity depending on impurities, however.

-2- My initial guess is that they are equal. The surface of each sphere is an equipotential surface, independent of whether the sphere is hollow or not.

-3- This is a trick question. There is no such thing as a "weightless point charge". Without mass, what would a force result in?
 
Thanks very much for helping me.

For the 2nd question, My professor stated that I need to figure to think of terms of (Energy Density = 0.5*D field . E field) to back it up mathematically.

For the 3rd question, I just wanted to know how how to undo the cross product. What velocity should I choose ?



Thanks very much :)
 
-2- Not sure I understand what you mean by energy density in this context. Do you mean the total amount of energy required to bring the net charge from infinity to the surface of the sphere(s)? Still should be the same in both cases, IMO.

-3- Let's assume the problem wording has been changed to "an electron" instead of a "weightless point charge". You need to have a mass to get an acceleration from the E and B fields. So you are mostly correct with the E-field answer, but you will measure the electron's acceleration, not the force on the point charge. I don't know of a practical way to measure the force directly. As for the B-field measurement, you don't have to "undo" the cross product. Let's say you get the electron moving somehow so it has a velocity v. Which direction is the resulting force from the B field going to act on the electron? The cross product shows you the vector situation. Let's say there is only a B field and no E field, and the electron has an initial velocity v in the x-direction. What is its motion going to look like? (Hint -- it will be a constant closed path motion...) And then what will be the general motion with both an E field and a B field at the same time?
 
Thanks very much. I understood measuring the B Field


About Electric Energy Density, I talked with my professor and he didnt give me clear full answer. He said it takes more energy to construct sold sphere of charge. Becasue we are doing work to push charges to the origin. Less energy for the shell (maximizing the distance from the charge on the surface to the origin).
 
Last edited:
If a material has a large permittivity, with it also follow that it will have a large conductivity ? Why or Why not ?

I think the higher the value of the permittivity, the less conductance
How I can justify that by physical insight means in general , if my above statement is true?


Thanks
 
Last edited:
See my statement -1- up in post #2. Look into the root of what it takes to make a good dielectric with high permittivity. And what quality do the charges have to have in a material that has a high conductivity?
 
To make good dielectric it should be a poor conductor of electricity, but an efficient supporter of electrostatic fields and metals have high conductivity casue metals possesses charges that are free to move about the material as conduction currents.
 
Last edited:
Correct. So if the charges are real free to move, it wouldn't seem to make much of a dielectric. What do you need for a good dielectric?

One caveat -- remember what I said about water. It's worth it for you to do a little reading about the dielectric constant of water, and how it might vary with conductivity due to impurities. I don't have any great links for it, but a quick google search should get you some stuff to read. Good luck!
 
  • #10
would you show me how to find the capacitance per meter for this following geometry. My prof mentioned it but didnt talk much about it, he insisted that we do some reading on our own
 

Attachments

  • cap1.JPG
    cap1.JPG
    4.2 KB · Views: 439
  • #11
In the figure,. The corner surface along the x and y-axis is held at potential of 0 Volts, and the hyperbolic surface y=1/x is held at potential of +4 Volts. The surfaces extend from –infinity < z < +infinity (out the paper) and extend towards infinity in the x and y directions, but the positive and negative surfaces never meet. The dielectric between the plates has a relative permittivity of €r= 4

a- Prove that the potential function between the conducting surfaces is V(r)= 4xy Volts where x and y in meters
b- Find the Voltage Vab between the points Pa(0.2,1,1) and Pb(1,0.5,2)
c- Find the surface charge density at the point (0,1,0)
 

Attachments

  • prob2.JPG
    prob2.JPG
    4.5 KB · Views: 487
  • #12
berkeman said:
-1-

-3- This is a trick question. There is no such thing as a "weightless point charge". Without mass, what would a force result in?

Why??
One simply has to step in a spaceship very far from any star/planet. Ok, the spaceship would still create a gravitational force on the charge but it's tiny...and one could imagine being in a a spherical spaceship, near the center so that the weight is truly near zero.
weren't you rather thinking about "massless charge" ?

I think it makes sense to talk about weightless charges here since the presence of a gravtitational force would make it impossible to disentangle the effect of the weight from the effect of an electric field (without resorting to using other objects). So I don't think it was a trick question.

My suggestion would be : first, place the charge at a point and release it from rest. Does it start to move? If yes, there is an electric field in the direction of the motion at that point (if q>0). Notice that if there was a gravitational force, I would be stuck.

Next, set the chare in motion in the direction of the E field. Does it move along a straight line? Or does it start to curve?

In the first case you cannot conclude there is no B field, it could be parallel to the E field and thus cause no force for motion in that direction. You then have to repeat the experiment by giving the charge a velocity in a different direction than the E field and see if it has an acceleration determined only by the E field or if there is an extra acceleration (which will come from the B field)

Patrick
 
  • #13
DeltaX said:
In the figure,. The corner surface along the x and y-axis is held at potential of 0 Volts, and the hyperbolic surface y=1/x is held at potential of +4 Volts. The surfaces extend from –infinity < z < +infinity (out the paper) and extend towards infinity in the x and y directions, but the positive and negative surfaces never meet. The dielectric between the plates has a relative permittivity of €r= 4

a- Prove that the potential function between the conducting surfaces is V(r)= 4xy Volts where x and y in meters
You are looking for a function V(x,y,z).
Now, this function is independent of z, by symmetry, so you really need a function V(x,y). In addition, from the graph, when y =1/x, V must be a constant equal to 4.

So V(x,y=1/x) =4.

Clearly, the function must be a function of the *product* xy, so you actually have V(x,y) = V(xy).

However, for infinite plates, the E fields are constant, so if we calculate [itex]E_x = - {\partial V \over \partial x}[/itex] let's say, we better get a constant. So the function must be linear in x. For the same reason it must be linear in y.

So that leaves us with V(x,y,z) = C_1 xy + C_2.

Imposing that V =0 at x=0 or y=0 gives C_2 =0. Imposing that V =4 at y=1/x gives C_1 = 4.

b- Find the Voltage Vab between the points Pa(0.2,1,1) and Pb(1,0.5,2)
Just plug in the coordinates in V(x,y,z) and subtract.
c- Find the surface charge density at the point (0,1,0)
The x and y components of the E fields are given by the partial derivatives I gave above. Also, you must have seen the equation relating the E field near the surface of an infinite plane to the surface charge density [itex]\sigma[/itex], right? You set the two equations for E_x equal and it will give you sigma of the vertical plate (which will be a function of y). Same for the horizontal plate.

Patrick
 
  • #14
Thanks for the help. But I always been thinking we assumed its C1.XY We know there has to be multiplication but why in this form, it can be X/Y , Y^-1 . X ,...

I was lookin at this problem and had some problem, would you guys please help ?


I Just worked it tru. Never mind :)
 

Attachments

  • untitled.JPG
    untitled.JPG
    42.9 KB · Views: 502
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
44
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K