1
$\begingroup$

I'm trying to understand the definition given on my electromagnetism course for the current density. More specifically, I want to know why, as defined below, the current density is given the name "current density."

On my course, the current density is $\vec{j}(t,\vec{x}):=\rho (t,\vec{x}) \vec{v} (t,\vec{x})$ where $\vec{v} (t,\vec{x})$ is the velocity field governing how the charged particles move. I'm trying to get some intuition for what this quantity is.

To give an example of what I'm talking about, in classical mechanics where you have momentum equal to mass multiplied by velocity, the definition makes sense intuitively because momentum is the oomph you will feel if an object hits you, and you feel that oomph more if either the mass or velocity of the object increases. So I have a really tangible idea of what momentum is.

Wikipedia describing current density: "In electromagnetism, and related fields in solid state physics, condensed matter physics etc. current density is the electric current per unit area of cross section." This justifies calling it a density (as it's an area density by defn.). I'm trying to understand what a current density could be, and in my head I've got an idea of a cross-sectional area with some fluid flowing through it (it's the same scenario in which I picutre Gauss' Law). I'm not sure what current at a point is, so I don't really understand what a current density could be! Then I need to relate this to the definition I've been given on my course somehow. Thanks for any help!

$\endgroup$
1
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Fluid or gas flow is exaclty the idea behind this concept. (In Latin, current means "flow, flowing".) Imagine a gas with varying density, or mixture of liquids with varying density, and calculate an area density of mass flow through cross section. You will get the same formula $\vec{\jmath}=\rho\vec{v}.$ And at the same time, it can be viewed as a volume density of momentum. $\endgroup$
    – firtree
    Commented Aug 19, 2014 at 13:36

2 Answers 2

4
$\begingroup$

firtree is correct - I will just try to flesh out his answer a bit.

(1) Your last question first - charge (or current) at a point is like mass at a point.

For finite masses, if you want to see how much is contained in an infinitely small volume (i.e., at a point), the answer is zero. So instead, people consider the mass density which can have non-zero values at a point. You probably understand the relationship between mass and (mass) density quite well.

Similarly for a finite current, the amount of current at a point (i.e., in an infinitely small volume) is zero. The current density is the limit of the amount of current in a small volume around a point as the volume goes to zero - just like mass density, but with current instead.

So, just as one speaks of mass density at a point and not mass at a point (for extended bodies), one speaks of charge density at a point and not charge at a point or current density at a point and not current at a point (we're ignoring point particles for now - they do fit into this formalism, but you need Dirac delta functions).

(2) Now, in analogy with mass flow, your picture of flow of charge is correct. Mass density times velocity gives a mass current density. $\vec{j}_{m}(t,\vec{x}):=\rho_{m} (t,\vec{x}) * \vec{v} (t,\vec{x})$. If you have a mass current density $\vec{j}_{m}$ and want to know the mass flow $\dot{m}$ through some area A, then you take

\begin{equation} \dot{m} = \int \vec{j}_{m} \cdot d\vec{A} \end{equation}

Similarly, charge density times velocity gives a charge current density. $\vec{j}_{q}(t,\vec{x}):=\rho_{q} (t,\vec{x}) * \vec{v} (t,\vec{x})$. If you have a charge current density $\vec{j}_{q}$ and you want to know the flow of charge $\dot{q}$ through some area A, then you take

\begin{equation} \dot{q} = \int \vec{j}_{q} \cdot d\vec{A} \end{equation}

So, the picture in your head is quite close - just picture charge or a fluid of charged particles flowing.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ This has made it much clearer, thank you! I'm just not 100% about one thing: why $\dot{m}$ is equal to the infinite sum of mass density times velocity. If mass is uniformly distributed, then the mass flow (or momentum) is equal to mass times velocity, but then when we use density (along with an infinite sum) in place of the mass, and take the result, I don't see why we can interpret the result as the (limit as volume---> zero), of (mass in that volume) times (velocity of that volume), which is what we need to do for $\dot{m}$ to be analogous to momentum in the uniform mass case. $\endgroup$
    – Lammey
    Commented Aug 19, 2014 at 15:44
  • $\begingroup$ Basically, what I mean is, why is $\int \rho \vec{v} \cdot d\vec{A}$ now the flow of mass in the case that the mass distribution not uniform? We're saying that the infinite sum of (density $\times$ velocity)=something analagous to (mass $\times$ velocity). And I can't see why this should be the case! $\endgroup$
    – Lammey
    Commented Aug 19, 2014 at 15:50
  • $\begingroup$ Do you know calculus? You seem hung up on the integral and not the physics. $\endgroup$
    – Aldo
    Commented Aug 19, 2014 at 16:09
  • $\begingroup$ I mean I'm ok with calculus, as in I understand the divergence theorem, stokes theorem etc, and I can understand that the mass contained in a volume $m=\int \rho (\vec{x})d\vec{x}$ where $\rho$ completely describes the mass density within that volume. I guess it's just that the product in the integral is confusing me, because while I understand that the infinitesimal sum of density gives mass, I don't understand why the infinitesimal sum of (density times velocity) gives (mass times velocity) $\endgroup$
    – Lammey
    Commented Aug 19, 2014 at 16:28
  • $\begingroup$ Got it. Think of your object with density $\rho(\vec{x})$ moving rigidly with constant velocity $\vec{v}$. In this case, the $\vec{v}$ can be pulled out of the equation and the integral is just as you wrote. If the velocity is not constant within the volume, then $\vec{v}$ is an average velocity. $\endgroup$
    – Aldo
    Commented Aug 19, 2014 at 16:36
0
$\begingroup$

I see it as follows.

Let us imagine standing in the pathe of an oncoming gush of a fluid. We feel the oomph of momentum. A particle of electric resistor in the path of electric current (perhaps) feels same oomph when electric current flows. The higher the current density the higher the oopmh the particle of electrical resistance feels.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.