Electrical constant
(previously also called
dielectric constant
) is a physical constant, a scalar quantity included in the expressions of some laws of electromagnetism, including Coulomb’s law, when written in a rationalized form corresponding to the International System of Units (SI) [1].
Sometimes, using outdated terminology, it is called the electric (or dielectric) constant of vacuum [2]. It is measured in farads divided by meter.
Numerical value
Considering that the speed of light in the SI is assigned an exact value, by definition equal to 299,792,458 m/s, the last relation implies the numerical value of \varepsilon_0 in the SI:
\varepsilon_0 = \frac{1}{4 \pi\times\ 299792458^2 \times 10^{-7}} f/m \approx 8.85418781762039\times 10^{-12} f m−1.
Or, to express the same thing in terms of SI base units,
\varepsilon_0 \approx 8.85418781762039\times 10^{-12} m−3 kg−1 s4 A2.
In the SGSM system \mu_0 = 1 and therefore \varepsilon_0 = \frac{1}{c^2}\approx 1.11265005605362\times 10^{-21} s2 cm−2.
Numeric value[ | ]
In the International System of Units[ | ]
Before the 2018-2019 SI changes[ | ]
Since in SI the exact value
equality μ 0 = 4 π × 10 − 7 {\displaystyle \mu _{0}=4\pi \ \times \ 10^{-7}\ } /, then for the electric constant the relation ε
0 = 1 4 π c 2 ⋅ 10 7 {\displaystyle \varepsilon _{0}={\frac {1}{4\pi c^{2}}}\cdot 10^{7}} m/H,[3] which
was also exact
.
Considering that the speed of light in the SI is assigned an exact value, by definition equal to 299,792,458 m/s, the last relation implies the numerical value of ε 0 {\displaystyle \varepsilon _{0}} in the SI:
ε 0 = 1 4 π ⋅ 299792458 2 × 10 − 7 {\displaystyle \varepsilon _{0}={\frac {1}{4\pi \cdot \299792458^{2}\times 10^{-7}} }} F/m ≈ 8.85418781762039 · 10−12 F m−1.
Or, to express the same thing in terms of SI base units,
ε0 ≈ 8.85418781762039 · 10−12 m−3 kg−1 s4 A2.
After changes to the SI 2018-2019[ | ]
Since 2022, changes to the SI have come into force, including, in particular, the redefinition of the ampere based on fixing the numerical value of the elementary charge. This led to the fact that the value of the electrical constant became an experimentally determined value, although numerically its value remained the same with high accuracy. Electrical constant value recommended by CODATA[4]:
ε0 = 8.8541878128(13) 10−12 m−3 kg−1 s4 A2, or F m−1.
In the GHS system[ | ]
In the CGS system, the electric constant as a coefficient connecting the intensity and induction of the electric field in a vacuum can also be introduced. Moreover, in different versions of the GHS system, the electrical constant has different dimensions and meanings. Specifically, the Gaussian system of units and the SGSE system are constructed so that the electric constant is dimensionless and equal to 1, and in the SGSM system it is equal to ε0 = 1/ c
2 ≈ 1.11265005605362 · 10−21 s2 cm−2.
Some equations of electrodynamics in SI
In material equations, in a vacuum, the electric induction vector \mathbf{D} and the electric field strength vector \mathbf{E} are related through the electric constant:
\mathbf{D} = \varepsilon_0 \ \mathbf{E}.
It is also included in the notation of Coulomb’s law (also in a vacuum):
\mathbf{F}_{12}=\frac{1}{4\pi\varepsilon_0}\cdot\frac{q_1 q_2}{r_{12}^2} \frac{\mathbf{r}_{12} }{r_{12}}.
When using SI, the product of the electrical constant and the relative dielectric constant is called absolute
dielectric constant.
Direct electric current
Direct electric current is the directional, ordered movement of elementary (material) particles carrying electric charges. At the same time, negatively charged particles - electrons - move in metals (metallic conductors), as well as in a vacuum, and in liquids (solutions of salts and acids) - both negatively and positively charged material particles - ions moving in opposite directions (towards each other ). In rarefied gases, electric current can be carried out by the movement of both electrons and ions.
Direct current - does not change over time, i.e. is constant in direction and magnitude. The direction of direct current is taken to be the direction of movement of positively charged particles. It follows that in metal conductors, as well as in vacuum and gases, the direction of the current is taken opposite to the direction of movement of electrons.
The simplest DC circuits. The simplest direct current circuit consists of the following elements: a source of electricity; electrical receiver (energy consumer); wires
In addition, the current circuit usually includes measuring instruments and certain devices for turning the current on and off.
The representation of an electrical circuit using conventional graphic symbols is called an electrical circuit (Fig. 1.1). Any source of electricity has an electromotive force (EMF), under the influence of which the movement of elementary particles carrying electrical charges occurs in it, and a potential difference is created at its poles. Electromotive force is denoted by the Latin letters E or e.
The difference in electrical potential between the poles of a current source, under the influence of which an electric current flows in an external circuit, is called the electrical voltage acting in this circuit. Voltage is denoted by the Latin letter U. The unit of measurement for EMF and voltage is volt (V). The instruments for measuring them are called voltmeters.
The strength of electric current is designated by the letter / and is measured in amperes (A). A device for measuring current is called an ammeter.
Electric current can only flow through a circuit when it is closed, i.e. when a continuous path is provided for electrical charges from the “plus” of the current source to the “minus” (see Fig. 1.1). Therefore, in this case, in order for current to appear in the circuit, it is necessary to close switch 5. The presence of current in the circuit will be detected by the lighting of the electric lamp 4 and the reading of ammeter 3. The voltage value in the circuit is determined by the reading of voltmeter 2. If you open switch 5 and thereby break electrical circuit, the current in it will stop, the lamp will go out, and the ammeter needle will go to zero.
DC operation and power. The power of a direct electric current is determined by the product of the voltage U acting in the circuit and the current I flowing through the circuit. The unit of power is watt (W).
Power is designated by the letter P and is determined by the formula
P =UI. (1.1)
When measuring voltage in volts and current in amperes, the power value is expressed in watts.
The work of electric current (A), equal to the amount of electrical energy expended during a given time, is determined by the formula
A= Pt= UIt (1.2)
where P is the power of direct electric current, W; t is the time during which this power was given, s; U is the voltage acting in the circuit, V; I - current strength, A.
The work of electric current, determined by formula (1.2), is expressed in joules (J) or kilowatt-hours (kW h). It is easy to calculate that 1 kWh is equal to 3,600,000 J.
Direct electric current is the directional, ordered movement of elementary (material) particles carrying electric charges. At the same time, negatively charged particles - electrons - move in metals (metallic conductors), as well as in a vacuum, and in liquids (solutions of salts and acids) - both negatively and positively charged material particles - ions moving in opposite directions (towards each other ). In rarefied gases, electric current can be carried out by the movement of both electrons and ions.
Direct current - does not change over time, i.e. is constant in direction and magnitude. The direction of direct current is taken to be the direction of movement of positively charged particles. It follows that in metal conductors, as well as in vacuum and gases, the direction of the current is taken opposite to the direction of movement of electrons.
The simplest DC circuits. The simplest direct current circuit consists of the following elements: a source of electricity; electrical receiver (energy consumer); wires
In addition, the current circuit usually includes measuring instruments and certain devices for turning the current on and off.
The representation of an electrical circuit using conventional graphic symbols is called an electrical circuit (Fig. 1.1). Any source of electricity has an electromotive force (EMF), under the influence of which the movement of elementary particles carrying electrical charges occurs in it, and a potential difference is created at its poles. Electromotive force is denoted by the Latin letters E or e.
The difference in electrical potential between the poles of a current source, under the influence of which an electric current flows in an external circuit, is called the electrical voltage acting in this circuit. Voltage is denoted by the Latin letter U. The unit of measurement for EMF and voltage is volt (V). The instruments for measuring them are called voltmeters.
The strength of electric current is designated by the letter / and is measured in amperes (A). A device for measuring current is called an ammeter.
Electric current can only flow through a circuit when it is closed, i.e. when a continuous path is provided for electrical charges from the “plus” of the current source to the “minus” (see Fig. 1.1). Therefore, in this case, in order for current to appear in the circuit, it is necessary to close switch 5. The presence of current in the circuit will be detected by the lighting of the electric lamp 4 and the reading of ammeter 3. The voltage value in the circuit is determined by the reading of voltmeter 2. If you open switch 5 and thereby break electrical circuit, the current in it will stop, the lamp will go out, and the ammeter needle will go to zero.
DC operation and power. The power of a direct electric current is determined by the product of the voltage U acting in the circuit and the current I flowing through the circuit. The unit of power is watt (W).
Power is designated by the letter P and is determined by the formula
P =UI. (1.1)
When measuring voltage in volts and current in amperes, the power value is expressed in watts.
The work of electric current (A), equal to the amount of electrical energy expended during a given time, is determined by the formula
A= Pt= UIt (1.2)
where P is the power of direct electric current, W; t is the time during which this power was given, s; U is the voltage acting in the circuit, V; I - current strength, A.
The work of electric current, determined by formula (1.2), is expressed in joules (J) or kilowatt-hours (kW h). It is easy to calculate that 1 kWh is equal to 3,600,000 J.
Intended redefinition
In 2011, the XXIV General Conference on Weights and Measures (CGPM) adopted a resolution[4], in which, in particular, it was proposed that in a future revision of the International System of Units (SI) several base units, including amperes, should be redefined so that they were based not on man-made artifacts, but on fundamental physical constants or properties of atoms.
It is assumed that in SI the value of the elementary electric charge e
the exact
will be assigned , and the new definition of ampere will be based on this exact value of the elementary charge, expressed in A.
The consequence of this approach to determining the ampere will be a change in the status of the electrical constant: after the proposed redefinition of the ampere, the value of the electrical constant will be equal to \frac{1}{4 \pi\times\ 299792458^2 \times \10^{-7}} F/m, but this value will acquire an error (uncertainty) and will be determined experimentally in the future [4].
Electrical constant
It is designated \(\large \varepsilon_{0}\), it describes the electrical properties of vacuum and is one of the fundamental physical constants.
The value of the electrical constant is:
\[\large \boxed { \varepsilon_{0} = 8{,}85 \cdot 10^{-12} \left(\frac{\text{Cl}^{2}}{ H \cdot \text{m }^{2}}\right) }\]
Together with the magnetic constant (link), \(\large \mu_{0}\) determines the speed at which electromagnetic waves (for example, visible light) propagate in a vacuum.
The formula for Coulomb's law contains the constant "k". The number “k” is calculated using a formula that relates it to the constant \(\large \varepsilon_{0}\) like this:
\[\large \boxed { k = \frac{1}{4\pi \cdot \varepsilon_{0}} } \]
Also, this constant appears in the formula describing the electric field strength.
Notes
- ↑ 1 2
[www.femto.com.ua/articles/part_2/4637.html
Electric constant
] - article in the Physical Encyclopedia - Dengub V. M., Smirnov V. G.
Units of quantities. Dictionary-reference book. - M.: Standards Publishing House, 1990. - P. 213. - 240 p. — ISBN 5-7050-0118-5. - The dimension m/H of the numerical coefficient is from the dimension of the magnetic constant.
- ↑ 12
[www.bipm.org/utils/en/pdf/24_CGPM_Resolution_1.pdf On the possible future revision of the International System of Units, the SI] (English) Resolution of the XXIV General Conference on Weights and Measures (2011) - Here, X stands for one or more significant figures that will be determined in the final version based on the best recommendations of the Committee on Data for Science and Technology (CODATA)
| : Incorrect or missing image | To improve this physics article, it is advisable to:
|
ELECTRICAL CONSTANT
Fedorov V.V., Ponomarev D.A., Bondarenko T.V.
May 03, 2015
Before discussing the role of the electric constant in classical electrostatics, it should first be noted that in the International System of Physical Units (SI), adopted by the 11th General Conference on Weights and Measures (1960), there is no Coulomb [1] among the basic ones [1]. measuring the amount of electrical charges. This looks at least somewhat strange, since the Coulomb interaction is one of the two primary natural stationary ones and the elementary charge carriers have been established (its value has been established (we are not talking about reliability)), but for some reason the number of charges has come to be considered a derivative physical quantity, involving Newtonian abstraction in the interpretation. 1 Cl
= 1
A
× 1
sec
, and “
ampere
is
the strength of a constant current
,
which
,
passing through two parallel straight conductors of infinite length and negligibly small circular cross-sectional area
,
located at a distance of
1
m from each other in a vacuum
,
would cause a force between these conductors
equal to
2∙10–7
N per meter of length
” [2]
. This definition of the quantitative measure of charges (through abstraction) is an example from SI, which clearly emphasizes its “advantages”. The fact that time is identified with the duration of any process [2]: “ A second
is
a unit of time
equal to
9102631770 periods
of radiation
corresponding
between two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium atom
-133”, and is elevated in SI to the rank of a basic concept - this the tragedy of theoretical natural science throughout the Newtonian era. With abstract time in the classics, many derivative concepts (quantities) are formed, for which they even come up with some kind of physical meaning, forgetting that abstraction always remains abstraction.
Since Coulomb's law is written by analogy with Newton's erroneous law of universal gravitation, the electric constant is just an adjustable DIMENSIONLESS
coefficient in Coulomb's law, which in CTE, in principle, could have neither theoretical justification nor corresponding experimental confirmation.
Undoubtedly, to begin with, the very dimension of this constant ( farad
/
meter
[1, 2]), perhaps already states that its interpretation requires special clarification, since the distribution of charges along a conductor is fundamentally different from the distribution of mass in this homogeneous conductor.
We can say that the charge is mobile, and even the geometry of its surface directly influences the distribution of elementary charges over the surface of the conductor
.
This experimental fact has been known to every researcher since school
, and in the classics they propose to take it into account with the concept of electrical capacity.
This is on the one hand, and on the other, in classical electrostatics, the farad
is a unit of measurement of the electrical capacitance of an isolated conductor in a vacuum, the potential φ of which changes by 1
volt
when a charge
q
of 1
coulomb
[3, p. 65]:
1f
= 1
k
/1
v
.
If in the classics the field potential of a point charge q
at an arbitrary point in space is equal to (hereinafter ε = 1)
where is the electrical constant, and r
is the distance (scalar) from a point charge
q
to a point with a test unit charge in the surrounding space, then in this case an objection immediately arises to the value of the potential calculated in this way: “what specifically is hidden behind the dimensionless constant when the charges are point? "
The answer is obvious and simple - change the unit of measurement of potential, and that’s it. And if the charge
q is distributed discretely
over the surface of the conductor, then?
For example, in [3, p. 63] it is noted that “when a certain amount of electricity is imparted to an isolated conductor, charges are distributed over its surface with different surface densities σ. However, the nature of this distribution does not depend on the total charge q
, but only on the shape of the conductor.
Each new part of the charges is distributed over the surface of the conductor like the previous one. Thus, with an n
-fold increase in the charge
q
of a conductor, σ at any point on its surface increases by the same factor.
In other words, σ is directly proportional to q
, that is
σ = kq
,
where k
– some function of the coordinates of the surface point under consideration.”
Undoubtedly, the quotation of the classical narrative should have ended here, since already from this paragraph it is clear that when presenting the electrical capacity of a solitary conductor in the classics, they do not even use strict mathematical formalism, but a set of mathematical blunders, creating the appearance of a physical and mathematical justification for this concept.
Indeed, if
σ = dq
/
dS
=
kq
, then
dq
/
q
=
kdS
and
d
ln
q
=
kdS
.
Therefore, k
in principle cannot be a function of the coordinates of a surface point
.
Without distorting the source [3, pp. 63-64], we will quote further: “Let us divide the surface S
conductor to infinitesimal elements
dS
carrying charges σ∙
dS
.
Each such charge can be considered a point charge. The potential d
φ of the charge field σ ∙dS at a point located at a distance
r
is equal to
Integrating this expression over the entire closed surface S
charged conductor, we find the potential at an arbitrary point of its electric field:
Replacing σ using formula (3) and taking out q
for the integral sign, we get
For a point lying on the surface of the conductor, r
is a function of the coordinates of this point and the element
dS
.
In this case, the integral on the right side of equation (7) depends only on the size and shape of the
surface
S. The choice of a point on the surface S
does not matter, since for all points of the conductor φ = const and the values are the same. ...
2. From formula (7) it is clear that the potential of a solitary conductor is directly proportional to its charge. Ratio q
to φ for a given conductor is called electrical capacitance (electrical capacity, or simply capacity)
C
, i.e.
C
=
q
/φ,
or
WITH
”
The author's objections to this classic narrative are as follows:
1. The field potential around a solitary point charge is an abstraction that exists only among theorists who are either unable to realize that the characteristics of interaction can only be discussed in a system of charges (at least two, separated in space), or fundamentally do not want to eliminate obvious errors in the theories (laws) of their predecessors;
2. If the classics state that the nature of this charge distribution does not depend on its total charge q
, but only on the shape of the conductor, it is obvious that expression (3) is meaningless, since the surface charge density can only be formally defined in the form
and not in the form (3), in which k
–
NOT “a certain function of the coordinates of the surface point under consideration
,
but an unknown function of the coordinates of a point of an arbitrary conductor surface
.
This is firstly, and secondly, by dq we mean not an infinitesimal value, but an elementary charge
, which is generally not spread over the
dS
the conductor surface;
3. Undoubtedly, if we are blindly guided by mathematical formalism (see (10)), then in this case definition (6) should be written in the form
formal integration of which is possible for r
= const, and
r
is the distance between two points in one-dimensional space (
Where is the discreteness of point charges and their distribution over the surface of the conductor?
);
4. Potential
, in general, is
a vector function of a vector argument
(distance
r
is a concept of one-dimensional space), and therefore the use of integral calculus to determine the potential at points on the surface of a conductor or at points in its surrounding space (remember, ε = 1) is a mathematical absurdity.
Integration should be replaced by the summation of the i -th vector potentials
characterizing the interaction between a point charge on the surface of a conductor and a test unit point charge at the point in space under consideration, that is
where is a vector with a beginning in a test point charge and an end in a point charge of the same name.
Combining the origins of the Cartesian rectangular coordinate system with a unit point charge, we have
And
If the values are , then the total potential in the system “charged conductor – test charge at the origin”, in which the test charge is located, will be determined by the following expression:
The difference between the classical definitions (6) and (15) of the same characteristic in a system of point charges is obvious, and most importantly: the potential
–
vector quantity
.
This is precisely what should be taken into account when determining the potential in the case of charge distribution q
>> over the surface of a conductor with arbitrary geometry;
5. Potential
is
a vector quantity
, and therefore, guided only by the formalism of vector analysis and taking into account (15), we have
A
It is very important to note here that the last three expressions formally define the characteristics of electrostatic interaction in the “charged conductor – test unit charge” system, and only (15) and (17) are vector
,
and (16) is a scalar function of the vector argument
.
(In the classics, the vector function , where is the vector of three-dimensional space
, is mistakenly identified with the scalar function 1/
r
(where
r
is the distance, that is, the concept of
one-dimensional
space), to which the divergence operation is not applicable by definition!)
Since experimentally measure
(or compensate)
only intensive
(vector)
quantities
, then the obvious question is - what law was established by Coulomb using torsion balances? The answer to this question is obvious and obviously negative, since the scalar ( ) cannot be determined experimentally. The answer to the question about the measured quantity using torsion balances in the absence of a well-founded method for determining the magnitude of the charge of the ball in Coulomb’s time (and even now is not very reliable) should generally be considered premature.
Let us consider an example of the theoretical determination of the potential of a solitary conducting ball of radius r
, carrying a charge
Q
= ∑ ( is a unit point charge and
Q
>> ) and located in a homogeneous medium with dielectric constant ε = 1. As a “device” that registers the potential on the surface of the ball, we will consider one of the charges, considering that it does not affect the determination of the very value of the electrostatic repulsion potential on the surface of the ball.
Guided by the author's solution to the time problem, the principle of superposition, taking into account the symmetry of the placement of charges on a spherical surface
and assuming that
the point charge
(“device”)
is located at the origin of the coordinate system
, we write the expression that determines the value of
the FIRST vector electrostatic potential
on the surface of the ball in this form:
where = is the magnitude of the elementary point charge, n
is the total number of charges,
r
is the radius of the ball, is
the unit vector on the diameter of the ball d
drawn
from a point charge
.
We emphasize that in determining the value of the first potential (18) there is no place for the electric constant, as it should be. This emphasizes its far-fetched role in classical electrostatics. This is on the one hand, and on the other hand, result (18) corresponds to the example of the simplest surface and the possibility of reducing the problem of determining the value of the first vector potential n
identical point charges placed on the surface of the ball to the problem of two point charges of the same size, but with a different radius, that is,
R
=
r
/(
n
– 1)
.
If the conducting body is not a ball, but is a body with a complex surface, then the problem of theoretically determining the value of the first vector potential immediately becomes practically unsolvable. Indeed, for a charged body with a complex surface and with an unknown distribution of point charges ( = ) over the surface of a conductor, the first potential on its surface at an arbitrary point
P
(0, 0, 0),
where the charge is located
, is determined by the following functional expression:
where i
= 1, 2, 3, …, (
n
– 1).
Guided by the classical definition of the electrical capacity of bodies (8) (in general, without charges and electrostatic interaction) and using (19), we have
where are the coordinates i
th point charge, and =
Q
is the total charge of a solitary conductor.
If the classical physical and mathematical justification of the concept of electrical capacity in the classics (9) is a misunderstanding, then (20) already in its physical interpretation differs from the classical one, since the definition of the value of the first vector potential in the author’s electrostatics differs from the generally accepted one. But this, in the authors’ opinion, is not yet a solution to the problem of electrical capacity in science. We can say that until now none of the luminaries of classical physics and their like-minded people have noticed the lack of a comprehensive physical and mathematical justification for the concept of electrical capacity of a solitary conductor, and therefore this fact already clearly declares the mossiness of all theoretical electrostatics. The creators of classical physics in solving this problem (as in many others) are trailing behind the experimenters, hopelessly lagging behind, perhaps by at least a century.
This is firstly, and secondly, point charges distributed over the surface of, for example, a conducting solitary ball are at rest relative to each other, and therefore, in the authors’ opinion, the use of the mathematical apparatus of vector analysis (field theory) is unlikely to lead to the result , capable of radically changing the erroneous classical definition of the electrical capacity of the body in question.
r as a charged solitary conductor
, then the so-called surface charge density is
Since the value
A
That
From (24) it is obvious that the values of the concepts of surface charge density on a ball and the square of electrostatic potential on its surface are fundamentally different from each other, that is
It is very important to emphasize here that only for n
= 2 σ > (exception), and for all
n
> 2 σ < .
Since equality is excluded
, all classical arguments about the possibility of using the concept of surface charge density in determining the electrical capacity of a solitary ball automatically turn, figuratively speaking, into soap bubbles.
Undoubtedly, if the electrical capacity of a conductor is a quantitative measure of its ability to hold an electric charge on its surface [1], then this means that the value of the electrical capacity
, for example,
a solitary ball is determined by the ratio Q to
.
Indeed, if from (22) it follows
then the value of the electrical capacity of a solitary sphere
where n
is the number of elementary charges on the surface of the ball,
Q
=
n
, and
r
is the radius of the ball.
Consequently, the electrical capacity of a solitary ball in the author’s electrostatics with the basic concepts of charge and distance is a derived physical quantity and clearly depends only on these basic quantities
, that is,
= f ( n , r )
, where
n
is the number of charged particles (ions) on the surface (!) of a ball of radius
r
.
Since in the classics the capacity of a solitary sphere of radius r
[3, page 65]
where = 8.85∙10–12 f
/
m
, and
r
is the radius of the ball, then comparison with the author’s definition (27) for the same ball in the form of a ratio is possible, that is
We emphasize that if the author’s definition of the electrical capacity of a solitary ball (27) and the result (29) do not require any additional explanation, then the statement reflecting the classical views on the concept of electrical capacity [3, p. 65]: “ Neither from the conductor material
,
on its state of aggregation
,
nor on the shape and size of possible cavities inside the conductor
.
This is due to the fact
that
excess charges are distributed only on the outer surface of the conductor
.
It should be noted
that
C also does not depend on either the charge of the conductor or its potential
.
This does not at all contradict relation
(8),
which only shows
that
the potential of a solitary conductor is directly proportional to its charge and inversely proportional to its capacity
,” requires fundamental changes and they are as follows:
First, SQUARE POTENTIAL
(potential - vector quantity)
of an isolated conductor is directly proportional to its charge and inversely proportional to the electrical capacity
(see (27));
Secondly , the electrical capacity of a solitary conductor clearly depends on its material
, that is, on the ability of atoms or molecules of the conductor material in the surface layer to form ions of a certain size and sign.
This fact is already taken into account on an industrial scale, without waiting for the justifications and recommendations of modern theorists. For example, “ consider one of the technical capacitors
-
an electrolytic capacitor
.
One of its plates is made of aluminum foil
,
and the second serves as the capacitor body and electrolyte
, ...
In addition
,
the aluminum plate must always be connected to the positive pole of the voltage source
. …” [3, p. 71].
So, the electric constant
with the classical dimension
of farad
per
meter
[1] is
a dimensionless quantity
, which only due to a misunderstanding in classical physics is included in the list of fundamental physical constants.
Its role in theoretical electrostatics is obviously negative, and its appearance is connected only with the recording of the law of electrostatic interaction of charges in the image and likeness of Newton’s law of universal gravitation
.
Coulomb's law is an inference by analogy with Newton's erroneous law, for which the theoretical justification of the experimental technique was not considered at all one of the decisive criteria for testing the validity of the hypothesis
.
An analogy is not proof at all, and if the original “law” is erroneous, then its analogue cannot differ from it. The price of such an analogy depends on the role of the original and its analogue in theoretical natural science. In this case, we are not talking about some minor laws of physics, but about the fundamental laws of primary natural interactions, which with their authenticity personify the path of development of all theoretical natural sciences. Relying only on analogy, Coulomb repeated Newton's mistake. In experiments with charged balls, Coulomb, in principle, could not even obtain results that would allow him to formulate a hypothesis about the interaction of charges, since he could only divide the charge of the balls in half
,
but not quantify it
. Note that there is also a gravitational interaction between the balls, which must be taken into account, and guided by Newton’s not erroneous law.
It would not be superfluous to draw the attention of natural science theorists to the fact that the International System of Units of Measurement
(SI) is, perhaps, one of the last documents in which the world scientific community is still trying to protect Newton’s fruitless legacy in theoretical natural science from constructive criticism.
This is confirmed by the fact that abstract time (Newtonian duration)
in the list of basic
(basic)
units of measurement , and
the basic concept of charge
(the number of elementary charges)
is included in the list of derived units of measurement
.
This is already quite enough to admit that the creation of SI in general hardly contributes to the actual progress of theoretical natural science, but only imitates it. Theoretical natural science (physics of real bodies) does not need such a system of units of physical quantities, and the statement [1]: “ The first three basic units
(
meter, kilogram, second
)
allow us to form consistent derivative units for all quantities
of
a mechanical nature
” is only automatically repeats the mistakes of its predecessors.
It hardly makes sense in theoretical natural science to engage in the coordination of derived units with each other
if
they are formed using an abstract basis
!
The basic concepts in theoretical natural science include mass
,
charge and distance
, and derivatives for the corresponding sections of the physics of real bodies (particles) are formed using this list or part of it.
There is no doubt that as long as in theoretical natural science time will be considered a basic concept
,
and not a derived physical quantity
,
such natural science was and will be speculative
.
Using “ impression
” (Laplace on time), derived units of measurement are not formed and physical theories are not developed.
Literature
1. Physical encyclopedic dictionary. M., “Soviet Encyclopedia”, 1983.
2. Yavorsky B.M. and A.A. Detlaff, Handbook of Physics. M., Nauka, Main editorial office of physical and mathematical literature, 1981.
3. Yavorsky B.M., Detlaf A.A., Milkovskaya L.B., Course of physics, volume 2. M., publishing house “Higher School”, 1966.
Best regards, authors.
PS
Reactions to this message can be found on the following scientific forums:
"Hypotheses of unofficial physics"
"Alternative Physics" on SciTecLibrary
"Physics" on e-science.ru
return to: Fundamentals of Physics
You can send your comments to:
© V.V. Fedorov, D.A. Ponomarev 2022.
Copyright information. Last checked: June 24, 2018.
Excerpt characterizing the Electric Constant
– The fodder was not delivered in that quantity... The Emperor interrupted him. - At what time was General Schmit killed?... - At seven o’clock, it seems. - At 7:00. Very sad! Very sad! The Emperor said his thanks and bowed. Prince Andrei came out and was immediately surrounded on all sides by courtiers. Kind eyes looked at him from all sides and gentle words were heard. Yesterday's adjutant reproached him for not staying at the palace and offered him his home. The Minister of War approached, congratulating him on the Order of Maria Theresa, 3rd class, which the Emperor had bestowed upon him. The Empress's chamberlain invited him to see Her Majesty. The Archduchess also wanted to see him. He didn’t know who to answer, and took a few seconds to collect his thoughts. The Russian envoy took him by the shoulder, took him to the window and began to talk to him. Contrary to Bilibin’s words, the news he brought was received joyfully. A thanksgiving service was scheduled. Kutuzov was awarded the Grand Cross by Maria Theresa, and the entire army received decorations. Bolkonsky received invitations from all sides and had to make visits to the main dignitaries of Austria all morning. Having finished his visits at five o'clock in the evening, mentally composing a letter to his father about the battle and about his trip to Brunn, Prince Andrei returned home to Bilibin. At the porch of the house occupied by Bilibin, a britzka half-stuffed with belongings stood, and Franz, Bilibin’s servant, with difficulty dragging his suitcase, came out of the door. Before going to Bilibin, Prince Andrei went to a bookstore to stock up on books for the trip and sat in the shop. - What's happened? – asked Bolkonsky. - Ach, Erlaucht? - said Franz, with difficulty loading the suitcase into the chaise. – Wir ziehen noch weiter. Der Bosewicht ist schon wieder hinter uns her! [Ah, your Excellency! We go even further. The villain is already on our heels again.] - What is it? What? - asked Prince Andrei. Bilibin came out to meet Bolkonsky. There was excitement on Bilibin’s always calm face. “Non, non, avouez que c'est charmant,” he said, “cette histoire du pont de Thabor (bridge in Vienna). Ils l'ont passe sans coup ferir. [No, no, admit that this is a delight, this story with the Tabor Bridge. They crossed it without resistance.] Prince Andrey did not understand anything. - Where are you from that you don’t know what all the coachmen in the city already know? - I am from the Archduchess. I didn't hear anything there. – And didn’t you see that they are stacking everywhere? - I haven’t seen it... But what’s the matter? – Prince Andrei asked impatiently. - What's the matter? The fact is that the French crossed the bridge that Auesperg defends, and the bridge was not blown up, so Murat is now running along the road to Brunn, and today they will be here tomorrow. - Like here? How come they didn’t blow up the bridge when it was mined? – And this is what I’m asking you. Nobody, not even Bonaparte himself, knows this. Bolkonsky shrugged. “But if the bridge is crossed, it means the army is lost: it will be cut off,” he said. “That’s the thing,” answered Bilibin. - Listen. The French are entering Vienna, as I told you. Everything is very good. The next day, that is, yesterday, gentlemen marshals: Murat Lann and Belliard, sit on horseback and go to the bridge. (Note that all three are Gascons.) Gentlemen,” says one, “you know that the Tabor Bridge is mined and counter-mined, and that in front of it is a formidable tete de pont and fifteen thousand troops, who have been ordered to blow up the bridge and not let us in.” But our sovereign Emperor Napoleon will be pleased if we take this bridge. The three of us will go and take this bridge. “Let’s go,” others say; and they set off and take the bridge, cross it and now with the entire army on this side of the Danube they are heading towards us, towards you and towards your messages. “No more joking,” said Prince Andrei sadly and seriously. This news was sad and at the same time pleasant for Prince Andrei. As soon as he learned that the Russian army was in such a hopeless situation, it occurred to him that he was precisely destined to lead the Russian army out of this situation, that here he was, that Toulon, who would lead him out of the ranks of unknown officers and open the first path for him to glory! Listening to Bilibin, he was already thinking how, having arrived at the army, he would present an opinion at the military council that alone would save the army, and how he alone would be entrusted with the execution of this plan.
