1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Relationship between current and current density for a volume conductor

  1. Jan 31, 2013 #1
    (I'd like to preface this with the warning that the following question may be a very dumb one.)

    My understanding is that current density (or flux) [itex] \vec{J} = \vec{J}(x, y, z) [/itex] is the rate of flow of charge (or the current) per unit area. (Units of [itex] \frac{\text{C/s}}{\text{cm}^2} [/itex].)

    Say we know that in an irregularly shaped volume conductor (e.g. a nerve fiber, where the irregularity is due to some sort of biological obstruction), the current density [itex] \vec{J} [/itex] has the form given in Figure 1 (see attachments).

    The current [itex] I [/itex] is --- I think --- given from Ohm's law: specifically, if the potential difference across the ends of the fiber and the total resistance of the fiber are known, then

    I = \frac{V}{R},

    which is a scalar quantity. I believe this value is constant for each point [itex] (x, y, z) [/itex] in the fiber, assuming no build-up of current anywhere (by the law of conservation of charge).

    Now I know that the surface integral of a flux gives a flow rate, so the surface integral of [itex] \vec{J} [/itex] should give a current. But is the current equal to [itex] I [/itex]? I mean, does

    \iint_S \vec{J} \cdot \vec{n} dS = I

    for every [itex] S [/itex], or only for [itex] S [/itex] = cross-sectional area of the conductor? The reason I ask is because, if I draw three example surfaces [itex] S_1, S_2, S_3 [/itex] (Figure 2), the surface integral of [itex] \vec{J} [/itex] over [itex] S_1 [/itex] is obviously not equal to that over [itex] S_2 [/itex].

    So I guess what I am asking is: is
    I = \iint_{S_1} \vec{J} \cdot \vec{n} dS_1 = \iint_{S_3} \vec{J} \cdot \vec{n} dS_3 \neq \iint_{S_2} \vec{J} \cdot \vec{n} dS_2
    true, where [itex] I [/itex] is current as found from Ohm's law? And if so, does this mean that any current [itex] I [/itex] through a conductor is not simply the rate of flow of charge, but a rate of flow of charge implicitly with respect to the cross-sectional area?


    Attached Files:

    • Fig1.png
      File size:
      109.9 KB
    • Fig2.png
      File size:
      92.3 KB
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 31, 2013 #2


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Fine up to here.
    No, this is wrong. Current I is a total amount, that is, it's the integral of J across a surface as you've written below. It doesn't make sense to talk about I at an infinitesimal point (x,y,z).
    In your example, it is the second option.
    Yes. Usually it's obvious what that surface is (current in a wire refers to the area of the wire), but if the surface isn't obvious then you need to specify it.
  4. Jan 31, 2013 #3
    Thank you for clearing things up.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook