Maxwell's equations & Conductors

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the behavior of electric fields within conductors, particularly the assertion that there is no electric field (E-field) inside a perfect conductor. It is noted that this concept is an idealization applicable to perfect conductors, where charges can move to the surface to screen out any ambient fields. In real conductors, a small E-field can exist due to finite conductivity, and time-varying fields can penetrate to a limited extent characterized by skin depth. The conversation also clarifies the definition of "inside" a conductor, distinguishing between solid and hollow regions, with the consensus that the E-field is zero in the solid region of a perfect conductor. Overall, the discussion emphasizes the idealized nature of these principles in classical physics.
Swapnil
Messages
459
Reaction score
6
Is the fact that there could be no E-field inside a conductor purely experimental? I don't see any way to apply Maxwell's equations to prove this fact.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If there is an E field in a region with mobile charge carriers then there will be a current. So after all currents have died away, either the E field must be canceled or the medium will have run out of charge carriers. Does that help?
 
Zero E field is an idealization that holds for perfect conductivity where exactly enough charges can move to the surface to screen out an ambient field. This is actually seen in superconductors, although related phenomena like the Meissner effect require quantum mechanics to explain. For ordinary metals of finite conductivity, a small DC field can exist inside according to Ohm's Law
\vec{J}=\sigma\vec{E}

Time varying fields, on the other hand, are screened by circulating eddy currents, and penetrate a small distance characterized by the skin depth. This is covered under discussions of wave propagation in conducting media, in upper class E&M books like Schwartz or Reitz and Milford. Here's a link that contains the derivations in sections 6.19-6.20
"www.sp.phy.cam.ac.uk/teaching/em/waves.pdf"[/URL]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dick said:
If there is an E field in a region with mobile charge carriers then there will be a current. So after all currents have died away, either the E field must be canceled or the medium will have run out of charge carriers. Does that help?
Yeah, this makes sense. Eventhough in order to prove that there is no E-field inside the conductor we are assuming that there is no current inside the conductor, the assumption of there being no current is more pleasing.

BTW, whenever we say "inside" a conductor (in the context of there being no E-field), do we always refer to the region where the conductor is solid?
 
If you mean inside a void in a conductor - sure, E can be non-zero in there.
 
Dick said:
If you mean inside a void in a conductor - sure, E can be non-zero in there.
No, I meant to say that in general when we say "There is no E-field inside a conductor," what does "inside" actually mean?

For example, consider spherical conductor shell. It hass two regions -- the region between the inner and outer surface of the conductor which is solid and the region between the center of the conductor and the inner surface which hollow. Which region would you call the "inside" of the conductor?
 
Last edited:
I would call 'inside the conductor' inside of the conducting shell.
 
Dick said:
I would call 'inside the conductor' inside of the conducting shell.

I am not sure which region you are referring to... the hollow region or the solid region?
 
  • #10
The solid region - where the mobile charges are.
 
  • #11
So, in general, the E-field in the solid region of a conductor would always be zero (for perfect conductors of course), right?
 
  • #12
Swapnil said:
So, in general, the E-field in the solid region of a conductor would always be zero (for perfect conductors of course), right?

Anyone? ...
 
  • #13
Swapnil said:
So, in general, the E-field in the solid region of a conductor would always be zero (for perfect conductors of course), right?

Yes, it would always be zero. Just keep in mind that this, like much of classical physics, is an idealization.
 
Back
Top