Electric field due to current carrying wire

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The electric field outside a current-carrying wire is generally considered to be zero for direct current (DC) due to the net charge being neutral. However, for alternating current (AC), the situation changes significantly as the frequency increases, leading to a non-zero electric field influenced by surface charges. Griffiths' text does not extensively cover the electric field around current-carrying wires, which contributes to common misconceptions. For a comprehensive understanding, references such as A. Sommerfeld's "Lectures on Theoretical Physics" and the paper by Hernandes and Assis in PHYSICAL REVIEW E provide deeper insights into the behavior of electric fields in these contexts.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Griffiths' "Introduction to Electrodynamics" concepts
  • Familiarity with electrostatics and charge density concepts
  • Knowledge of AC and DC current behavior
  • Basic principles of Gauss' law
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the electric field behavior in AC circuits, focusing on frequency effects
  • Review A. Sommerfeld's "Lectures on Theoretical Physics, Vol. III" for advanced electrodynamics
  • Examine the paper "Electric potential for a resistive toroidal conductor carrying a steady azimuthal current" by Hernandes and Assis
  • Explore the implications of surface charge on current-carrying conductors
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in electrical engineering, physicists studying electrodynamics, and anyone interested in the behavior of electric fields around current-carrying wires.

Aziza
Messages
189
Reaction score
1
What is the electric field due to a current carrying wire? In a Griffiths EM problem, he treats the E field outside a current-carrying wire as if it were due to a static charge distribution. Is this a valid approximation? Upon google-searching i get very vague/contradicting answers, so any help is appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Outside the wire, I think there should be no E field, seeing that the net charge is 0 (?).
 
GregoryGr said:
Outside the wire, I think there should be no E field, seeing that the net charge is 0 (?).

That's only if the wire has enough positive charges to make it a charge neutral wire.

To the OP: Are you referring to the magnetic field due to a current, or the electric field from a non-neutral wire? As far as I remember, there were no examples in Griffiths where he talked about E-Field outside of a current-carrying wire.

In electrostatics, you often will encounter something like "a wire with charge density ##\lambda##.
 
Yes, Griffiths looks at the charge distribution in a current carrying wire as static: this is because the electrons even though the electrons have quite large velocities (easily calculated via kinetic theory), the motion is essentially random except for the drift velocity due to the impressed field of the battery or generator.

As a result the field is essentially zero outside the wire for DC currents; for AC the situation changes dramatically as the AC frequency increases from a few Hz to kHz to MHz to GHz - though Griffiths text does not get into transmission line theory in any depth.
 
This is a misconception pretty common. It comes from the fact that many textbooks do not discuss the electric field around the current conducting wire. There is a detailed treatment of a current conducting coax cable in

A. Sommerfeld, Lectures on Theoretical Physics, Vol. III (Electrodynamics), Academic Press (1952)

You find this also on my German FAQ page (including a relativistic treatment too).

What's not discussed there, is the surface charge on the wire, but that's implicit in the jump of the radial component of the electric field:

http://theory.gsi.de/~vanhees/faq/coax/coax.html

The toroidal conductor is treated in

PHYSICAL REVIEW E 68, 046611 (2003)
Electric potential for a resistive toroidal conductor carrying a steady azimuthal current
J. A. Hernandes and A. K. T. Assis
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.68.046611
 
I don't speak German, could someone outline why the E-field would be nonzero? Surely the AC surface charge won't have any effect, take any Gauss' law cylindrical volume and however the charge is distributed radially within the cable, it'll still be zero net charge within the volume unless your cable is itself charged (i.e. someone added some extra electrons so that they outnumber the Cu protons).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Sticky
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K