Codex @codex  0

Joule heating is the dissipative conversion of electrical work into internal energy in an electrical conductor. In a metal, the electric field supplies energy to charge carriers, which transfer it to the material. This makes an immersed resistor a useful calibrated heater and makes electrical resistance a source of losses in wiring. Wind-driven electric currents are a proposed source of heating of an inflated giant planet.

For a stationary, purely resistive Ohmic conductor, use the passive sign convention: $V$ is the terminal electric potential difference from the entry to the exit of positive electric current $I$. The absorbed electrical power and Ohm's law giveThe last two expressions assume $V=IR$ at the relevant material temperature. For constant electrical resistance and electric current over a duration $\Delta t$, the dissipated energy is $E_{\mathrm{diss}}=I^{2}R\Delta t$; otherwise use $E_{\mathrm{diss}}=\int V(t)I(t)dt$. In SI, $\mathrm{V}\mathrm{A}=\mathrm{W}=J/s$.^[ref]

Absorbed electrical power $VI$ is more general than Joule heating: a capacitor can store energy, a battery can change its chemical energy, and an electrical circuit can deliver mechanical work or emit light. Even a heated resistor need not show an indefinitely rising temperature: in a thermal steady state, its dissipated power leaves by heat transfer. With the heater inside a calorimeter boundary, electrical input crosses as work; the subsequent heat transfer to the room is a different term in the first law of thermodynamics.

A change between a material behaving as an electrical conductor and as an electrical insulator. The distinction concerns the limiting electronic response as temperature tends to zero; finite thermally activated electrical conductivity alone does not establish a metallic state. A Peierls transition opens a band gap through a change in the crystal structure.

Motional electromotive force is the contribution ${\oint }_C(\mathbf{v}\times \mathbf{B})\cdot d\mathbf{l}$ from an electrical conductor moving with local velocity $\mathbf{v}$ through a magnetic field. The cross product comes from the magnetic part of the Lorentz force. For a straight rod of length $\ell$, perpendicular to both its velocity and a uniform magnetic field, its magnitude is $B\ell v$. The sign depends on the direction of integration along the rod. ^[ref].

For a computed example, take $\ell =0.50\mathrm{m}$, velocity $\mathbf{v}=2.0\hat{\mathbf{x}}m/s$ to the right, and magnetic field $\mathbf{B}=0.40\hat{\mathbf{z}}\mathrm{T}$ out of the page. The rod lies along $y$. ThenPositive electric charge is driven downward. For an isolated rod after charge separation has equilibrated, $\mathbf{E}=-\mathbf{v}\times \mathbf{B}$ inside it, and the electric potential difference is $V_{\mathrm{bottom}}-V_{\mathrm{top}}=+0.40\mathrm{V}$; the bottom is positive. This open-circuit statement does not imply a sustained electric current.

Close the rod's path with stationary U-shaped rails and an electrical resistance $R>0$ at the left. With out-of-page unit normal, the positive loop direction is counterclockwise, hence upward along the rod. If the rod's horizontal position is $x(t)$, the enclosed area is $A=\ell x$ and the external magnetic flux is ${\Phi }_{\mathrm{ext}}=B\ell x$. ThusHere the resistive approximation neglects self-inductance. The negative electric current is clockwise, downward along the rod, consistent with the charge-separation calculation and Lenz's law.

The closed-loop result illustrates why the moving-circuit form of Faraday's law of induction includes motional electromotive force: the magnetic field is constant in time, so the electric field circulation alone would miss this drive. Its mechanical consequence is electromagnetic braking of a sliding rod.

A parallel-plate capacitor consists of two parallel electrical conductors with overlapping area $A$ and separation $d$. If the gap is small compared with both plate widths and is filled by a uniform material of positive permittivity $ϵ$, its capacitance is approximatelyThis neglects the fringing field of a capacitor near the plate edges. The interior electric field points from the plate of positive electric charge to the plate of negative electric charge, and is approximately uniform. ^[ref].

For a worked vacuum example, stipulate $A=0.01{\mathrm{m}}^2$, $d=0.001\mathrm{m}$, and vacuum permittivity ${ϵ}_0\approx 8.854\times 10^{-12}F/m$. This rounds the value in Fundamental Physical Constants — Complete Listing by National Institute of Standards and Technology and others. Within the approximation,At terminal electric potential difference $V=10\mathrm{V}$, the electric field magnitude is $E\simeq V/d=10^{4}V/m$, the plate electric charge magnitude is $Q=CV=0.8854\mathrm{nC}$, and the capacitor energy is $U=C{V}^2/2=4.427\mathrm{nJ}$. These numbers use the stipulated rounded vacuum permittivity; finite plates also have corrections from the fringing field of a capacitor.

The formula makes design changes easy to predict: doubling the overlapping area doubles the capacitance, and halving the gap doubles the capacitance, with permittivity fixed and the fringing field of a capacitor neglected. Doubling permittivity also doubles capacitance if the material uniformly fills the gap and remains linear. This lets a compact device store more separated electric charge at the same terminal electric potential difference.

The short derivation uses surface charge density $\sigma =Q/A$. In the interior, Gauss's law gives electric field magnitude $E\simeq \sigma /ϵ=Q/(ϵA)$. The electric potential difference is $V\simeq Ed=Qd/(ϵA)$, so dividing $Q$ by $V$ gives $C\simeq ϵA/d$. A narrow curved capacitor gap has the same leading local approximation when its width is much less than the curvature radius.

Let $\mathbf{n}=\mathbf{r}/a$ be the unit normal from the electrical conductor into the vacuum. The electrostatic boundary conditions at a conductor, together with the vanishing interior electric field, giveWrite $u=\cos \theta$ in spherical coordinates, $D=|\mathbf{r}-{\mathbf{r}}_0|$ on $r=a$, and $z^{\star }=a^2/r_0$. Differentiating the electric potential at fixed angles givesHere the distance identity in the preceding answer was used before simplifying. Hence the induced surface charge density isFor positive $q$ this surface charge density is negative everywhere, with largest magnitude nearest the point charge.

The image charge for a grounded conducting sphere is obtained by the Kelvin transform:It lies inside the electrical conductor, outside the region where it represents the physical electric field. The electric potential isAt the physical point charge, the electric potential has its usual Coulomb's law singularity. There is no physical singularity at the image charge: the interior expression is identically zero.

For $|\mathbf{r}|=a$, direct expansion of squared distances givesConsequently the two terms cancel exactly, proving the zero Dirichlet boundary condition on the sphere. At infinity each term is $O(r^{-1})$, and more explicitlyThus the Dirichlet boundary condition at infinity also holds. The candidate solves the Poisson equation with the one physical point charge; uniqueness of Poisson equation, with these Dirichlet boundary conditions, identifies it as the required electric potential.

The Bloch theorem says that for a translation-invariant lattice Hamiltonian, eigenstates can be chosen as ${\psi }_k(x+a)=e^{ika}{\psi }_k(x)$, or ${\psi }_k(x)=e^{ikx}{u}_k(x)$ with $u_k$ periodic of period $a$. The localized site orbitals are translates, ${\varphi }_n(x)={\varphi }_0(x-na)$ and ${\chi }_n(x)={\chi }_0(x-na)$. In the tight-binding model, neglect intersite overlap and useProjecting the Schrödinger equation onto each localized orbital gives its onsite energy times its own coefficient, plus the four stated neighbor matrix elements. ThusFor the Bloch amplitudes, set $z=\cos ka$. The coefficient eigenproblem isso the two energy bands areA first Brillouin zone is $-\pi /a\le k<\pi /a$; wavevectors differing by $2\pi /a$ are equivalent. Put $\Sigma =E_0+E_1$, $D=\sqrt{(E_1-E_0{)}^2+16A^2}$. Each band is nonincreasing as a function of $z\in [-1,1]$, because $d{E}_{\pm }/dz=-2A\pm 8A^{2}z/\sqrt{(E_1-E_0{)}^2+16A^2{z}^2}\le 0$. HenceThe extrema occur at $k=0$ and at the zone edge; they may be nonunique when $E_0=E_1$, in which case the gap vanishes. In the trial wavefunction, replacing $x$ by $x+a$ and reindexing $n$ produces exactly the factor $e^{ika}$, verifying Bloch theorem directly.

An electrical conductor has available nearby unoccupied states in a partially filled band or overlapping bands. A band insulator has filled lower bands separated from empty higher bands by a large gap. A semiconductor has the same filled-band structure with a smaller gap, so thermal excitation or doping supplies mobile electrons and holes. Band filling and carrier availability, not just the existence of two bands, determine which description applies.

The method of images replaces electrical conductors by fictitious image charges outside the physical region. Choose the image charges so that the physical electric charges and their images produce the prescribed constant electric potential on every conducting boundary. The uniqueness theorem for the electrostatic potential then identifies this constructed electric potential with the physical solution in the charge-containing region. Several conducting planes can require several, or infinitely many, image charges; a single reflected image is sufficient for one infinite plane.

Put the plane at $z=0$ and the point charge at $(0,0,d)$. For $z>0$, use an image charge $-q$ at $(0,0,-d)$:This vanishes on the plane. An arbitrary constant can be added if a different reference electric potential is chosen. Excluding the point charge's own electric field, Coulomb's law givesThe separation from the image charge is $2d$, and the force is attractive for either sign of $q$. No imposed external electric field is included.

A large electrical conductor between the point charges provides electrostatic shielding: one must not retain their original mutual Coulomb force through an ideal infinite plate. In the usual broad-plate approximation, let $\sigma$ denote the unperturbed surface charge density on each face. The electrostatic boundary condition gives an outward electric field $E_0=\sigma /{ϵ}_0$. Neglecting local electrostatic induction, the rod's tension then satisfies $mg\tan \varphi =Q{E}_0$, givingThere are two physical qualifications. First, if $\sigma$ means the total charge per projected plate area, shared equally between the two faces, then $E_0=\sigma /(2{ϵ}_0)$ and the same approximation gives $\varphi \simeq 0.989^{\circ }$. The factor of two is a convention about the specified surface charge density, not a different Gauss's law.

Second, a point charge near an electrical conductor makes its surface charge density nonuniform. For an infinite plane with prescribed background electric field $E_0$, the method of images adds an attractive force $k{Q}^2/(4x^2)$, where $x=l\sin \varphi$. The more accurate equilibrium equation isIts larger, stable root is approximately $1.96^{\circ }$ for the per-face convention, or $0.877^{\circ }$ for the total-area convention. This ideal-plane refinement is not an exact answer for an unspecified finite plate: its dimensions and the meaning of the quoted surface charge density would be needed. In particular, adding a uniform-sheet electric field to the original mutual repulsion would describe a different, nonshielding model.

In vacuum, Gauss's law states that the outward electric flux through a closed surface is the enclosed electric charge divided by the vacuum permittivity:Take opposite electric charges $\pm Q$ on the two electrical conductors, with surface charge densities $\pm \sigma =\pm Q/A$. A Gaussian pillbox crossing one isolated large sheet gives $2ES=\sigma S/{ϵ}_0$, so each sheet contributes $\sigma /(2{ϵ}_0)$ on either side. By the superposition principle, the electric fields add between the sheets and cancel outside. Ignoring the fringing field of a capacitor, the gap electric field is $E=\sigma /{ϵ}_0$. The electric potential difference and capacitance of this parallel-plate capacitor are consequentlyThe approximation requires $d$ much smaller than both transverse sheet dimensions. A uniform filling with permittivity $ϵ$ replaces ${ϵ}_0$ by $ϵ$.

Put electric charge $+Q$ on the inner electrical conductor and $-Q$ on the outer one. In the gap, spherical symmetry makes the electric field radial and constant on a spherical Gaussian surface. Gauss's law givesThe inner-to-outer electric potential difference is thereforeThus the capacitance of the spherical capacitor isAs $b\to \infty$ this gives the capacitance of an isolated conducting sphere, $4\pi {ϵ}_{0}a$; for $b-a\ll a$ it approaches the parallel-plate capacitor result with area $4\pi a^2$.

Let the original cylinder axis be $\mathbf{r}=0$, and let the hole axis be at transverse vector $\mathbf{a}$, with $|\mathbf{a}|=a$. The charge density is reproduced by a full cylinder of radius $R_1$ and charge density $+\rho$, superposed with a cylinder of radius $R_2$ centred at $\mathbf{a}$ and charge density $-\rho$. This uses the superposition principle for fixed insulating electric charges; the hole is not a hole in an electrical conductor.

For a complete uniformly charged infinite cylinder of radius $R$, a coaxial Gaussian surface of length $\ell$ gives, by Gauss's law,Consequently defineThe complete electric field, including the exterior if desired, isIn the insulating material, $|\mathbf{r}|<R_1$ and $s=|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{a}|>R_2$, soInside the hole both contributions use their interior formulas, and all dependence on $\mathbf{r}$ cancels:The electric field in the hole is uniform, points from the original axis towards the hole axis for $\rho >0$, and vanishes for a concentric hole. The two expressions agree at the hole wall, as expected with no imposed surface charge density there. Its uniformity is the useful uniform electric field in an off-axis cylindrical cavity result.

Take the grounded electrical conductor to occupy $z\le 0$ and approximate the negligible-radius charged sphere by a point charge $Q$ at ${\mathbf{r}}_{+}=D\hat{\mathbf{z}}$. Put a fictitious image charge $-Q$ at ${\mathbf{r}}_{-}=-D\hat{\mathbf{z}}$. The constructed electric potential is zero on $z=0$, has the correct point charge singularity, and vanishes at infinity. The uniqueness theorem for the electrostatic potential makes it the physical electric potential for $z>0$:Taking its negative gradient gives the requested electric field outside the small sphere:On the plane at cylindrical radius $r$, the tangential components cancel and the normal component isThe electrostatic boundary conditions at a conductor, with outward unit normal $+\hat{\mathbf{z}}$ and zero interior electric field, give the induced surface charge densityFinally integrate over annuli of area $2\pi rdr$:The image charge is a computational device, not a real charge below the plane. For a finite conducting sphere, its induced polarization would change the point-source approximation; the stated negligible radius is essential.

Assume the electrical conductor is nonmagnetic, with magnetic permeability ${\mu }_0$, and neglect end effects. Rotational symmetry and translational symmetry make the magnetic flux density azimuthal and constant along a coaxial circle. The magnetostatic Ampère law therefore givesUniform current density is $j=I/(\pi a^2)$, so $I_{\mathrm{enc}}(r)=j\pi r^2=I{r}^2/a^2$. ThusThe direction follows the right-hand rule around the electric current. For a uniform linear magnetic material, replace ${\mu }_0$ by its magnetic permeability.

Set the grounded plane at $z=0$ and the real point charge at $(0,0,h)$. The image charge $-q$ at $(0,0,-h)$ makes the electrostatic potential vanish throughout the plane. The uniqueness theorem for the electrostatic potential then identifies the physical solution in $z>0$:The normal electric field is $E_z=-{\partial }_z\Phi$. Differentiation givesand thereforeFor $q>0$ the electric field points into the electrical conductor, consistently with negative induced surface charge density.

Apply the superposition principle to the result of part (a). If $F(a,h)=-qh/[2\pi {ϵ}_0(a^2+h^2{)}^{3/2}]$, then the exact normal electric field from the two real point charges and their image charges isFor $d\ll h$, Taylor's theorem gives $E_z=-d{\partial }_{h}F+O(d^2)$. Sincethe leading electric dipole result isThe electric dipole moment is $\mathbf{p}=-qd\hat{\mathbf{z}}$. The circle $a=\sqrt{2}h$ is the zero of the leading normal electric field and hence of the induced surface charge density. Inside it, induced surface charge density is negative; outside it, positive. The tangential electric field is zero everywhere on the grounded electrical conductor, so the leading full electric field vanishes on that circle. The corresponding dipole-induced charge on a grounded plane integrates to zero over the whole plane: the negative central region is balanced by the positive exterior.

For finite $d$, $a=\sqrt{2}h$ is only the leading-order zero. With $u=h^{2/3}$ and $v=(h+d{)}^{2/3}$, the exact zero satisfies $a^2=uv(u+v)$, giving $a=\sqrt{2}(h+d/2)+O(d^2/h)$. For example, inserting any $d>0$ in the exact expression at $a=\sqrt{2}h$ does not give zero. This is a controlled electric dipole approximation, not an exact finite-separation identity.

A wave propagates an organized disturbance through space. What oscillates depends on the medium: displacement in a string or solid, pressure and density in a fluid, electric fields and magnetic fields in an electromagnetic wave, or a quantum wavefunction. The propagation law follows from the restoring mechanism, inertia and relevant boundary conditions. A common linear equation is $u_{tt}=c^2{\nabla }^{2}u$, whose plane waves obey $\omega =c|\mathbf{k}|$. The resulting phase velocity and group velocity coincide, so a narrow wave packet can travel without dispersive spreading. More generally the material supplies a dispersion relation $\omega (\mathbf{k})$; the envelope velocity is ${\nabla }_{\mathbf{k}}\omega$, while constant phase surfaces move at the corresponding phase velocity.

Mechanical waves make the balance of restoring force and inertia particularly visible. A flexible stretched string has $c=\sqrt{T/\mu }$: greater tension stiffens the string, whereas greater linear mass density slows its transverse motion. Small-amplitude acoustic waves in a uniform fluid are longitudinal, with $c_s=\sqrt{K_s/\rho }$, where $K_s$ is the adiabatic bulk modulus. For an ideal gas, $c_s=\sqrt{\gamma p/\rho }$. Pressure changes in rapid sound oscillations are approximately adiabatic because little heat crosses a wavelength in one period. Fluids do not support ordinary bulk shear waves, whereas an elastic solid supports both longitudinal and transverse waves. In an isotropic solid their speeds are $c_L=\sqrt{(K+4G/3)/\rho }$ and $c_T=\sqrt{G/\rho }$, where $G$ is the shear modulus.

A material can be dispersive even when its equilibrium properties are uniform. In a liquid with a free surface, gravity and surface tension act as restoring mechanisms. A simple inviscid capillary-gravity wave haswhere $h$ is depth and ${\gamma }_s$ is surface tension. Long shallow gravity waves have approximately constant speed $\sqrt{gh}$; deep-water gravity waves have $\omega =\sqrt{gk}$ and group velocity half their phase velocity. Short capillary waves have a different dispersion dominated by surface tension. Bending stiffness similarly changes short-wavelength propagation in a string or plate, giving a contribution proportional to $k^4$ in ${\omega }^2$. Different restoring mechanisms can therefore control different wavelength ranges of the same medium.

Electromagnetic waves propagate in vacuum without material displacement, because Maxwell equations couple changing electric and magnetic fields. They are transverse and travel at $c=1/\sqrt{{ϵ}_0{\mu }_0}$. In a simple transparent isotropic material, the phase speed is $1/\sqrt{ϵ\mu }=c/n$, where $n$ is the refractive index. Real material polarization depends on frequency. A Lorentz oscillator model for bound charges explains why permittivity and refractive index become strongly frequency dependent near material resonances, accompanied by absorption. In a birefringent medium, different field polarizations have different propagation constants, permitting wave plates and mode-dependent delays. A electrical conductor additionally supports dissipative currents; its complex wavenumber gives attenuation and, for a good conductor, a skin depth approximately $\sqrt{2/(\mu \sigma \omega )}$. Energy removed from the wave becomes heat rather than disappearing.

At an interface, frequency is conserved for stationary media, and tangential wave phase must match. These conditions give Snell's law for refraction and constrain reflected and transmitted directions. Amplitudes follow from continuity of the appropriate fields or mechanical forces. On strings the relevant mechanical impedance is $\sqrt{T\mu }$; for sound it is related to $\rho c_s$, and for electromagnetic waves to $\sqrt{\mu /ϵ}$. A mismatch gives wave reflection, and a lossless boundary conserves the total incident, reflected and transmitted power. Multiple reflections can reinforce or cancel, as in a Fabry–Pérot etalon. Total internal reflection and other boundary conditions confine waves in waveguides. Transverse modes then become discrete, and even an otherwise nondispersive material develops longitudinal cutoffs and wave dispersion. A membrane strip, for example, obeys ${\omega }_n^2=c_m^2[k^2+(n\pi /a{)}^2]$.

Propagation also involves transport and loss. The Poynting vector gives electromagnetic energy flux; mechanical energy transport is force or pressure times velocity, averaged over a cycle. Wave absorption, viscosity, electrical resistance and imperfect boundaries dissipate energy. Scattering redistributes energy into other directions and modes, while geometric spreading reduces local intensity without necessarily dissipating anything. These mechanisms should be distinguished when interpreting a decreasing measured amplitude. In strongly absorbing or rapidly varying dispersive regimes, the derivative called group velocity is not automatically the speed of a sharp signal front; pulse reshaping and the medium's causal response must be considered.

Finally, quantum matter waves illustrate how the same propagation mathematics can describe a different physical quantity. For a free nonrelativistic particle, $\omega =\hslash k^2/(2m)$, so the group velocity $\hslash k/m$ equals its particle velocity and differs from the phase speed $\hslash k/(2m)$. In a periodic crystal, Bloch's theorem replaces the free dispersion by energy bands. Their slope controls wave-packet velocity, $v_g={\hslash }^{-1}dE/dk$, and their curvature gives band effective mass. Thus mechanical confinement, material response and microscopic periodicity all reshape propagation through their allowed modes and dispersion, while the physical interpretation of the wave and its transported quantities remains essential.

Use the divergence identity for a cross product, followed by Faraday's law of induction and the Ampère-Maxwell equation:With the electromagnetic energy density of part (b), these giveIntegrate over a fixed volume $V$ and apply the divergence theorem, choosing $d\mathbf{S}$ outward:This is Poynting's theorem. The outward electromagnetic energy flux equals minus the power transferred to matter and minus the rate at which electromagnetic energy accumulates inside. For the dissipative electrical conductor in this question, the matter term is Ohmic heating.

A scanning tunneling microscope brings a tip and surface, both electrical conductors, close enough to leave only a small vacuum gap. An applied electric potential difference makes occupied electron states on one side able to feed unoccupied states on the other. Although the gap is a classically forbidden potential barrier, quantum tunnelling through its finite width produces an electric current.

For an approximate rectangular potential barrier of gap width $d$, the transmission probability, and thus the electric current at fixed small bias, varies approximately as $e^{-2\kappa d}$. This strong distance dependence makes the device sensitive to changes in separation on the scale of a chemical atom. Feedback control moves the tip vertically to keep the electric current constant during a scan; the required height changes form an image of the surface, with contrast also depending on its electronic states. The finite gap permits transmitted probability current, whereas the semi-infinite step in part (b) does not.

The Seebeck effect is the generation of a thermoelectric electromotive force by a temperature difference. In a thermocouple, two different homogeneous electrical conductors A and B connect a measuring junction at $T_h$ to two reference connections at a common $T_c$. With negligible electric current, the measured terminal voltage is determined by the difference of their Seebeck coefficients. A hot junction alone does not specify the reading: the reference temperature, the second material, and the terminal order matter.

For a motivating experiment, join one end of A to one end of B, insulating the wires elsewhere. Connect their free ends to identical meter leads at reference temperature $T_c$, for example in an ice-water heat bath. A meter with input electrical resistance much larger than the thermocouple's electrical resistance approximates an open circuit, meaning $I\approx 0$. Keep the measuring junction in a separately controlled heat bath at $T_h$ and wait for stable junction temperatures. Both reference connections must share $T_c$; identical leads with identical endpoint temperatures have cancelling thermoelectric contributions, allowing the meter to be elsewhere. ^[ref].

Define the reading as $V_{AB}=V_A-V_B$, with the positive input on the A reference terminal and the negative input on B. Use the Seebeck coefficient convention in which the voltage change along a homogeneous wire at zero electric current is $dV=-S(T)dT$. Following the path from A at $T_c$ to the common junction at $T_h$, then back along B to $T_c$, givesThis formula assumes homogeneous materials whose Seebeck coefficients depend only on the local temperature, and no additional uncompensated lead contributions. Here voltage is the electrical transport voltage associated with electrochemical potential, rather than a direct measurement of an isolated equilibrium contact electric potential.

Start with $T_h=T_c$, then increase $T_h$ while holding $T_c$ fixed and record $V_{AB}$ at each stable setting. In the ideal model the equal-temperature reading is zero. If $S_A-S_B>0$ throughout the interval, A reads positive when $T_h>T_c$. Exchanging meter inputs reverses the reading; exchanging the two junction temperatures reverses the oriented integral. Repeating the run with identical homogeneous materials gives zero because $S_A=S_B$. These controls test the stated model; a nonzero experimental baseline should be measured rather than silently removed by assuming it is zero.

For an explicitly toy linear example, stipulate constant Seebeck coefficients $S_A=25\mu V/K$ and $S_B=-15\mu V/K$. Choose reference temperature $T_c=20{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$ and measuring-junction temperature $T_h=70{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$. A temperature difference has the same numerical size in kelvins and on the degree Celsius scale, soSwapping the inputs gives $-2.00\mathrm{mV}$. Bringing both junction regions to the same temperature gives zero. With temperature-dependent Seebeck coefficients, shifting both junction temperatures equally while keeping their difference fixed can change the reading. No actual material pair is claimed to have the stipulated coefficients over this interval.

Real thermocouples need a calibrated voltage-versus-temperature relation: the constant-Seebeck coefficient approximation is useful only where the coefficient difference changes little. Wire inhomogeneity can make the result depend on where the temperature gradient lies, and reference connections at unequal or unknown temperatures introduce errors. An electronic reference correction uses a measured reference temperature in place of an ice bath. ^[ref]. Burns and colleagues provide the standardized reference functions for common letter-designated thermocouple types; the toy line above is not a replacement for them. ^[ref].

The historical experiment used a different detector. In his 1821–1823 investigations, Seebeck found that a closed electrical circuit of two dissimilar materials with junctions at different temperatures deflected a compass needle. The modern explanation is that thermoelectric electromotive force drives an electric current, whose magnetic field deflects the needle. The open-circuit experiment above detects voltage while drawing negligible electric current. The striking connection is that a thermal imbalance can become an electrical signal and then a magnetic response. ^[ref].