Electric Potential: V = IR Explained

AI Thread Summary
Electric potential is inversely related to distance, following a 1/distance formula, while the force between point charges follows an inverse square law. The confusion arises in relating electric potential to Ohm's Law (V = IR), which describes the behavior of charges in a material rather than the potential of individual charges. Ohm's Law is a material property and does not derive from the principles governing point charges. In uniform electric fields, the electric potential changes linearly with distance. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for grasping the relationship between electric potential and current flow.
touqra
Messages
284
Reaction score
0
Electric potential goes like the inverse of distance squared and the product of the two charges. But I can't see how this can produce V = IR.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
touqra said:
Electric potential goes like the inverse of distance squared and the product of the two charges. But I can't see how this can produce V = IR.

The relationship is very remote ! The first you cite is the potential of a *point charge in space*. The second (ohm's law) is the relationship between the motion and the potential distribution of a whole collection of charges within a certain material (which will have its influence on the dynamics).
Ohm's law is a material property (which doesn't always hold, btw), a bit like Hooke's law for the elastic behaviour of materials, while the first law you cited is more like, say, the law of Newtonian gravitation. You cannot derive Hooke's law from Newton's law of gravitation either.
 
touqra said:
Electric potential goes like the inverse of distance squared and the product of the two charges. But I can't see how this can produce V = IR.

The last time I saw, the potential went like one over distance (not squared!) and depended only on the source charge. What you say is true for the force between two point charges, though.
 
neutrino said:
The last time I saw, the potential went like one over distance (not squared!) and depended only on the source charge. What you say is true for the force between two point charges, though.

Ooops. I typed too fast. 1/distance squared for electric force. 1/distance for potential.
 
It might be good to review the microscopic Ohm's Law:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/ohmmic.html
although this presentation doesn't address the relevant issues in the order needed to address the OP.

As a first step, recall that when the electric field is uniform, the electric potential varies linearly with distance.
 
Last edited:
This is from Griffiths' Electrodynamics, 3rd edition, page 352. I am trying to calculate the divergence of the Maxwell stress tensor. The tensor is given as ##T_{ij} =\epsilon_0 (E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} E^2)+\frac 1 {\mu_0}(B_iB_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} B^2)##. To make things easier, I just want to focus on the part with the electrical field, i.e. I want to find the divergence of ##E_{ij}=E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij}E^2##. In matrix form, this tensor should look like this...
Thread 'Applying the Gauss (1835) formula for force between 2 parallel DC currents'
Please can anyone either:- (1) point me to a derivation of the perpendicular force (Fy) between two very long parallel wires carrying steady currents utilising the formula of Gauss for the force F along the line r between 2 charges? Or alternatively (2) point out where I have gone wrong in my method? I am having problems with calculating the direction and magnitude of the force as expected from modern (Biot-Savart-Maxwell-Lorentz) formula. Here is my method and results so far:- This...
Back
Top