P=U*I: Why do electrons drop ALL energy e*U in the circuit?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of power in electrical circuits, specifically the equation P=U*I, and the behavior of electrons as they transfer energy in a circuit. Participants explore theoretical and conceptual aspects of energy transfer, the role of electric fields, and alternative derivations of the power equation.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes a simple circuit and the relationship between voltage, current, and power, questioning why electrons are assumed to lose all their energy to the load.
  • Another participant argues that the kinetic energy of electrons is largely irrelevant outside of specific contexts like particle accelerators, suggesting that energy is carried by fields rather than individual electrons.
  • A participant questions how electrons "know" to give all their energy to the load, implying a need for a mechanism or understanding of energy transfer.
  • Another response reiterates that electrons do not carry energy to give; instead, the fields are responsible for energy transfer.
  • A participant raises a question about the speed of energy transfer in a circuit compared to the slow movement of electrons, seeking clarification on how quickly energy reaches the load.
  • One participant expresses a desire for an alternative derivation of P=U*I that does not rely on individual charges and their energy loss, indicating a need for a different conceptual framework.
  • Another participant suggests that P=U*I should be defined rather than derived, mentioning its connection to Kirchhoff's laws and Poynting's theorem in electromagnetism.
  • A participant notes that the current drawn by a motor may differ from the expected value based on the voltage and resistance, emphasizing the importance of using the voltage across the load.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of energy transfer in circuits, the role of electrons versus fields, and the derivation of the power equation. There is no consensus on these points, and multiple competing perspectives remain throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about the behavior of electrons and the nature of energy transfer are not fully explored, and there are unresolved questions regarding the derivation of the power equation without reference to individual charges.

greypilgrim
Messages
583
Reaction score
44
Hi.

Consider a simple circuit consisting of a voltage source ##U## and a load with resistance ##R##, e.g. a lamp or a motor. The current is given by ##I=U/R##. The number of electrons passing the circuit per second is ##n=I/e##. The power consumed by the load is calculated by
$$P=U\cdot I=U\cdot e\cdot n=\Delta E\cdot n\enspace,$$
where ##\Delta E=U\cdot e## is the (kinetic) energy an electron would gain traveling from the negative to the positive pole of the power source if there was no load.

In this computation, we assume the electron gives all its energy to the load and has kinetic energy zero when it arrives at the plus pole of the power source. But why is that? Why can't the electron maybe only lose half its energy to the load and still have kinetic energy when it enters the battery?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The kinetic energy of the electrons is pretty much irrelevant for any device other than a particle accelerator.

However, in a bigger picture view of the question, you should not think of energy being stored in individual electrons to be dropped off elsewhere later. The energy is in the fields.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: David Lewis
But how does the electron know this? Why does it "think" while passing the lamp "I need to give all my energy to the filament such that I arrive at the battery at rest"?
 
The electron doesn't know that. Neither does the electron carry energy to give to a load. The fields carry the energy.
 
Consider what happens when you turn on a light switch. The change in the fields moves at a little less than the speed of light. By contrast, the electrons move at about a mm/s. How quickly does the energy get from the source to the light? Is it something that happens nearly at the speed of light or closer to a mm/s?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn and vanhees71
Ok, then I think I need a different derivation of ##P=U\cdot I##. Because the equation I wrote in #1 starting from the right is basically the derivation I learned in school, i.e. looking at the energy difference of an electron (or any other current carrier) between the poles of a voltage source and then counting how many of them pass the circuit per second.

How can ##P=U\cdot I## be derived alternatively without looking at individual charges and make assumptions about how much energy they drop in the circuit?
 
greypilgrim said:
How can P=U⋅I be derived alternatively without looking at individual charges and make assumptions about how much energy they drop in the circuit?
In terms of circuit theory it should not be derived, it should simply be defined. Then with KVL and KCL you can show that it leads to energy conservation.

The place where you would derive it would be in electromagnetism, after Poynting's theorem is introduced. I like the treatment here, in chapter 11, especially 11.3

http://web.mit.edu/6.013_book/www/book.html
 
greypilgrim said:
Consider a simple circuit consisting of a voltage source U and a load with resistance R, e.g. a lamp or a motor. The current is given by I=U/R.
The current drawn by a motor will be less than V/R unless the motor shaft is prevented from turning. Also, the voltage across the load should be used, not the voltage of the source.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
6K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
10K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 114 ·
4
Replies
114
Views
12K