Electromagnetism

Electromagnetism describes how electric charge and electric current interact through the electric field $\mathbf{E}$ and magnetic field $\mathbf{B}$. The Maxwell equations describe the fields and their sources; the Lorentz force describes the response of a particle of electric charge $q$ and velocity $\mathbf{v}$:The electric field can change the particle's energy. The magnetic part of the Lorentz force is perpendicular to velocity, so magnetic forces do no work; they can bend a trajectory. These are local interactions: a particle responds to the electromagnetic field at its position. ^[ref].

The remarkable unification is that the same Maxwell equations connect Coulomb's law, Faraday's law of induction, and freely propagating electromagnetic waves. A changing electric field contributes to magnetic circulation through displacement current; together with Faraday's law, this permits waves in vacuum without conducting matter. The Poynting theorem then explains how the fields store and transport energy. This connects the force on a charge to the energy carried by light.

In his 1865 paper, James Clerk Maxwell derived transverse disturbances and compared the propagation speed inferred from electrical measurements with independently measured light speeds. Part VI, especially §§95–97, argues that their agreement supports identifying light as an electromagnetic wave. This was a comparison with finite experimental accuracy, rather than a numerical identity between the historical measurements. ^[ref]; ^[ref].

A nearby compass needle changes direction when a wire carries an electric current. Reversing the current or exchanging above/below positions reverses the magnetic action, connecting electric currents with magnetic fields. The long-wire idealization has $B={\mu }_{0}I/(2\pi r)$ and circular orientation given by the right-hand rule.

An electromagnetic coil is a wound electrical conductor whose turns add their magnetic fields and magnetic flux linkages. For closely spaced equivalent turns carrying the same electric current, the magnetic field is the single-turn result multiplied by the number of turns.

A quasistatic electromagnetic approximation neglects propagation delay over a vacuum device of characteristic size $L$ when $\omega L/c\ll 1$. It does not automatically discard every time derivative: an Ampere-Maxwell law calculation in a capacitor gap must retain displacement current. In a medium use the relevant propagation and response scales. The dominant approximately static electric field can be used to calculate a smaller induced magnetic field, provided the corrections to the dominant field remain small. Near a resonance or for a large distributed circuit, the size criterion alone may not justify an instantaneous lumped model.

Motion driven by the force on induced polarization in a nonuniform electric field. In the dipole regime its sign depends on the particle–medium polarizability contrast and its magnitude scales with particle volume.

The spherical-particle polarization-contrast factor $\tilde{K}=({\widetilde{ϵ}}_p-{\widetilde{ϵ}}_m)/({\widetilde{ϵ}}_p+2{\widetilde{ϵ}}_m)$. Its real part controls ordinary time-averaged dielectrophoresis in the quasistatic dipole approximation.

Electromagnetic reciprocity relates the response obtained after exchanging source and receiver in a linear reciprocal medium. For suitably normalized ports it gives a symmetric scattering matrix. It does not require zero reflection. A magnetically biased Faraday effect provides an important optical example in which reciprocity can fail.

Electricity concerns phenomena associated with electric charge, including electric fields and electric currents.

Electromagnetic induction includes an induced electromotive force associated with a changing magnetic field or motion of a conductor in a magnetic field. Faraday's law of induction and motional electromotive force specify the relevant contributions.

For a conducting disc of radius $a$ rotating in a uniform axial magnetic field $B$, the shaft-to-rim motional electromotive force is ${\int }_0^a\omega rBdr=\omega B{a}^2/2$. A current $I$ between shaft and rim gives the opposing torque $IB{a}^2/2$, making electromagnetic conversion power $\mathcal{E}I$ equal to mechanical torque times angular speed.

Braking caused by induced currents whose magnetic force opposes motion. energy removed from mechanical motion can become resistive heat; the force depends on magnetic-field gradients or boundary crossing, resistance and inductance.

A rectangular loop entering a uniform magnetic field while only one horizontal segment is immersed has motional electromotive force $Bav$. Neglecting self-inductance, its electric current is $Bav/R$ and its upward magnetic force is $(Ba{)}^{2}v/R$. The equation $m\dot{v}=mg-(Ba{)}^{2}v/R$ gives exponential relaxation toward $mgR/(Ba{)}^2$. This entry model ends when both horizontal segments enter the field; then their net magnetic force and the rate of change of external magnetic flux vanish.

A thin square loop rotating about a central in-plane axis has $\mathcal{I}=m{a}^2/6$. With ohmic current and decay slow compared with a rotation, the averaged torque is $-B^2{a}^4\omega /(2R)$. Its angular-speed decay time is $mR/(3B^2{a}^2)$; its kinetic-energy decay time is half that value.

A square wire loop partly in a uniform field has linear drag $B^2{a}^{2}v/R$, giving velocity-relaxation time ${\tau }_t=mR/(B^2{a}^2)$. For uniform wire of mass density ${\rho }_m$ and resistivity ${\rho }_e$, ${\tau }_t=16{\rho }_m{\rho }_e/B^2$, independent of wire dimensions.

The instantaneous-current approximation uses $I=\mathcal{E}/R$ and requires the electrical relaxation time $L/R$ to be negligible relative to the relevant mechanical changes. Otherwise circuit self-inductance changes the braking transient.

A square resistive loop of side $a$, moving normally across a sharp field edge at speed $v$, has induced current magnitude $Bav/R$ and drag magnitude $B^2{a}^{2}v/R$ while partially overlapping the field. Completely enclosed in a uniform static field it has no changing flux and, with neglected self-inductance, no current.

For a complete entry and exit of a small square loop, integrating the drag over two distances $a$ gives impulse magnitude $2B^2{a}^3/R$. This is independent of speed in the ideal sharp-edge, zero-inductance model, though dissipated energy is not.

Changing the magnetic flux through a long solenoid produces an exterior azimuthal electric field $E_{\varphi }(r,t)=-\dot{\Phi }(t)/(2\pi r)$ by Faraday's law of induction. A charge $q$ whose displacement is negligible during the switching receives mechanical momentumThe result assumes the usual quasistatic field approximation and neglects the particle's displacement while the pulse acts. It describes an electromagnetic induction effect, distinct from the static Aharonov-Bohm effect.

Mutual induction is electromagnetic induction in one electrical circuit associated with a changing electric current in another. In a fixed linear arrangement, mutual inductance quantifies the coupling.

A thermoelectric effect couples heat transfer and the transport of electric charge: a temperature gradient can generate an electromotive force, while an electric current can carry heat and cause heating or cooling at a junction of different materials. This coupling makes electrical measurement of temperature possible through a thermocouple, and permits conversion of a sustained flow of heat into electrical work. A finite open-circuit voltage does not itself deliver power: electrical power requires an electric current through a load. Thermoelectric conversion therefore involves both electromagnetism and thermodynamics. ^[ref].

The dimensionless material figure of merit is $ZT=S^2\sigma T/({\kappa }_e+{\kappa }_l)$. Device efficiency depends on its temperature dependence and parasitic losses, not only on one peak value.

For a constant-property pair with Seebeck difference ${\alpha }_{np}$, electrical resistance $R$ and thermal conductance $K$, $Z_{\mathrm{pair}}={\alpha }_{np}^2/(RK)$. With identical legs of individual resistivity $\rho$ and thermal conductivity $\kappa$, this is ${\alpha }_{np}^2/(4\rho \kappa )$, not ${\alpha }_{np}^2/(\rho \kappa )$.

Bringing several electronic valleys close in energy to increase useful valley degeneracy. Its transport benefit must be assessed together with mobility and scattering.

The combination $S^2\sigma$ of Seebeck coefficient and electrical conductivity. Increasing it alone need not increase ZT if thermal conductivity rises as well.

The Thomson effect is distributed reversible heating or cooling when an electric current flows through a homogeneous material with a temperature gradient. It is distinct from junction Peltier effect heating and even-in-current Joule heating.

A thermoelectric module connects thermoelectric material pairs between thermal faces. Electrical series connections and thermal parallel connections combine their transport responses for thermoelectric cooling or electrical generation.

A generator using the Seebeck effect to convert a temperature difference into electrical output.

A thermoelectric generator whose heat supply comes from radioactive decay. The Seebeck effect converts part of a temperature-driven heat flow into electrical output. The source's thermal power and the electrical power delivered by the converter are distinct quantities.

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].

The Seebeck coefficient $S(T)$ quantifies the thermoelectric voltage response per small temperature difference at zero electric current. Use $S=-dV/dT$ along a homogeneous material, with voltage understood through electrochemical potential. Its units are volts per kelvin, commonly $\mu V/K$. The word thermopower is also used, despite this being a voltage response rather than power; some authors use that word for $|S|$, so check their convention. ^[ref].

For the A-minus-B terminal order in the Seebeck effect experiment,Thus a small temperature difference around $T_0$ gives $V_{AB}\approx [S_A(T_0)-S_B(T_0)]\Delta T$. The finite-interval ratio $V_{AB}/\Delta T$ is an average of the coefficient difference, not necessarily its value at either endpoint. Ordinary two-material measurements determine a relative Seebeck coefficient: to recover $S_A$ from the measured difference, add a separately known $S_B$. Neither the choice of a zero for voltage nor the use of a familiar reference material makes $S_B$ identically zero.

A concrete research example is Martin and colleagues' 2021 certification experiment. They measured small temperature differences and voltages on six silicon–germanium specimens at 13 base temperatures between $295$ and $900\mathrm{K}$. At each setting they acquired 40 voltage-and-temperature-difference pairs and used linear regression with a free intercept, so a constant voltage offset did not become part of the slope. Platinum voltage leads required a reference-material correction; their terminal order gave $S_{\mathrm{measured}}=S_{\mathrm{Pt}}-S_{\mathrm{specimen}}$, hence $S_{\mathrm{specimen}}=S_{\mathrm{Pt}}-S_{\mathrm{measured}}$. This is an actual measurement protocol, unlike the toy plot above. ^[ref].

Microscopically, a temperature gradient changes charge carrier transport until an opposing electrical response balances it at zero net electric current. In the usual simple semiconductor picture, electrons and electron holes give opposite Seebeck coefficient signs, and their contributions are weighted by their electrical conductivities. The Seebeck coefficient is a transport property: density of states alone does not determine it, since carrier motion and scattering also matter. Its usefulness extends beyond temperature sensing to diagnosing which carriers transport electric charge. ^[ref].

A thermocouple uses two different electrical conductors and the Seebeck effect to infer a measuring-junction temperature from a voltage and a known reference temperature. The reference material and the reference temperature are distinct choices: B specifies the comparison Seebeck coefficient, while $T_c$ specifies the lower limit of the integral. The two-material experiment in Seebeck effect gives the geometry, sign convention, and calibration limitations.

The useful measurement is a pair: the raw terminal electric potential difference and the thermocouple reference junction temperature. For the A-positive terminal order and homogeneous-wire assumptions of Seebeck effect, write the open-circuit electromotive force asHere $T_h$ is the thermocouple measuring junction temperature and $T_c$ is the common temperature of the reference connections. The subscript $h$ names the measuring end; it need not be hotter. A voltmeter senses the complete connected thermoelectric path through the wires and its leads, in the electrochemical potential convention already described under Seebeck effect. It does not measure an absolute temperature, the individual Seebeck coefficient of A, or an isolated contact electric potential.

A thermopile connects multiple thermocouples in series to turn a temperature difference into a larger electrical signal. Absorbed thermal radiation can heat its sensing junctions while reference junctions remain cooler; the signal depends on the thermal and optical design.

A thermopile is an array of thermocouples connected as a series circuit with their electromotive forces adding in the chosen terminal order. It measures a collective temperature difference through the Seebeck effect. An open-circuit electric potential difference requires no externally supplied electric current through the array: a high-input-electrical resistance voltmeter reads the signal. The heat that maintains the junction temperature difference still comes from somewhere, such as absorbed electromagnetic radiation.

In a membrane detector, an absorbing film heats the measuring junctions while reference junctions lie on the surrounding support. Actual junction temperatures can differ across the membrane.^[ref] This converts difficult-to-observe heat transfer into an accessible electrical signal; the series connection combines many small contributions without requiring every thermocouple to have a separate meter.

Use the A-positive terminal order of Seebeck effect for each thermocouple. Its thermocouple measuring junction has temperature $T_{h,i}$ and its reference connections have temperature $T_{c,i}$. Define the difference of Seebeck coefficients as ${\alpha }_i(T)=S_{A,i}(T)-S_{B,i}(T)$. Connect the B reference end of one thermocouple to the A reference end of the next at a common local temperature, so the terminal electric potential differences add:The first A reference terminal is the positive meter input; the final B reference terminal is the negative input. Following this connected path and adding the individual Seebeck effect integrals proves the result. Matched meter leads with common endpoint temperatures cancel as in an isothermal terminal block. The manufacturer's sum formula also allows unequal individual contributions.^[ref]

If all pairs share $T_h,T_c$ and the same nearly constant difference $\alpha$ of Seebeck coefficients throughout that temperature interval, thenThis $\alpha$ is the pair's relative Seebeck coefficient, not either material's individual coefficient or a universal device constant. As an original constructed example, choose $N=20$, $\alpha =40\mu \mathrm{V}{\mathrm{K}}^{-1}$ and $\Delta T=5\mathrm{K}$. Each thermocouple contributes $0.20\mathrm{mV}$ andReversing the meter connections changes the sign. Exchanging $T_h$ and $T_c$ reverses the integrals and hence the electromotive force; this reversible sign response does not make a detector with heat conduction a reversible thermodynamic process. Reversing the wiring of one pair instead gives $(N-2)\alpha \Delta T$, because one contribution is subtracted rather than added. For this example the result is $3.6\mathrm{mV}$, and at equal junction temperatures every contribution vanishes.

The open-circuit condition matters. If the array's total electrical resistance is $R_{\mathrm{pile}}$ and the meter input has electrical resistance $R_m$, the elementary voltage divider model gives $V_m=V_{\mathrm{oc}}{R}_m/(R_m+R_{\mathrm{pile}})$. Thus $R_m\gg R_{\mathrm{pile}}$ is needed to suppress voltmeter loading. Appreciable electric current also permits Joule heating and the thermoelectric heat transfer to disturb the assumed junction temperatures.

A thermopile absorber converts incident electromagnetic radiation into heat near the thermocouple measuring junctions. Electrically separate junctions can share its temperature through thermal contact. The reference support provides a path for heat transfer and a comparison temperature; “cold” denotes this reference role, even if it is warmer than the absorber.

Distinguish incident power from absorbed power. A window, the illuminated area, and the absorption of the coating determine their relation. A detector's measured voltage sensitivity can depend on where a small illuminated spot lies.^[ref] The model in thermopile thermal response takes absorbed power as its input, so an optical calibration is a separate step.

A useful original model treats the thermopile absorber as one approximately uniform temperature $T_h(t)$ with heat capacity $C_{\mathrm{th}}$, connected to a fixed reference temperature $T_c$ by thermal conductance $G_{\mathrm{th}}$. Both parameters are positive constants here. Let $P_{\mathrm{abs}}(t)$ be an added absorbed power above the initial background. Linearize the outgoing heat transfer about that background. With $\Delta T=T_h-T_c$ measured from an initial state having $\Delta T=0$, conservation of energy gives the first-order linear differential equationThe left side is the rate of stored energy; the two terms on the right are added power and outgoing heat transfer. The effective thermal conductance can include several paths, rather than just heat conduction along the wires. The model assumes a stable reference, negligible electrical loading, a common absorber temperature, and changes small enough for constant parameters.

For a step from zero to constant $P_0$ at $t=0$, subtract the steady solution $\Delta T_{\infty }=P_0/G_{\mathrm{th}}$. The difference obeys exponential decay, so the initial condition fixesThe time constant has units $(\mathrm{J}{\mathrm{K}}^{-1})/(\mathrm{W}{\mathrm{K}}^{-1})=\mathrm{s}$. With the same constructed $N=20$ and $\alpha =40\mu \mathrm{V}{\mathrm{K}}^{-1}$, choose $C_{\mathrm{th}}=0.02\mathrm{J}{\mathrm{K}}^{-1}$, $G_{\mathrm{th}}=0.01\mathrm{W}{\mathrm{K}}^{-1}$ and $P_0=0.03\mathrm{W}$. ThenAt one time constant, the response is $1-e^{-1}\approx 0.632$ of its final value: $V_{\mathrm{oc}}(2\mathrm{s})\approx 1.52\mathrm{mV}$. Reaching $95\%$ requires $t=-\tau \ln (0.05)\approx 5.99\mathrm{s}$. A voltmeter read too soon therefore underestimates the steady signal even when its electrical calibration is perfect.

The steady ratio $V_{\infty }/P_0=N\alpha /G_{\mathrm{th}}$ is $0.080\mathrm{V}{\mathrm{W}}^{-1}$ in this constructed model. Halving thermal conductance doubles this ratio but also doubles the time constant if heat capacity stays fixed. Reducing heat capacity alone speeds the response without changing its steady value. Increasing $N$ gives a larger signal only at fixed individual temperature differences: adding legs can also change thermal conductance, heat capacity and electrical resistance. The algebra identifies coupled design choices, rather than predicting a particular manufactured detector.

A finite electrical resistance produces Thermal electrical noise. For nearly uniform absolute temperature $T$ and effective measurement signal bandwidth $B$, its root mean square open-circuit voltage isHere $k_{\mathrm{B}}$ is the Boltzmann constant. Thermal electrical noise in the sensing element is an important contribution, and the signal bandwidth enters its voltage variance.^[ref] If identical pairs have fixed electrical resistance $r$ and fixed $\Delta T$, then $R_{\mathrm{pile}}=Nr$: the signal grows as $N$ while this noise grows as $\sqrt{N}$. The resulting signal-to-noise ratio grows only as $\sqrt{N}$ under those assumptions. Reference temperature drift, environmental electromagnetic radiation, and meter noise remain separate limits; reducing signal bandwidth trades fast information for less integrated electrical noise.

PASCO's documented lamp experiment connects a TD-8553 thermopile sensor to a millivoltmeter and places it level with a lamp filament along a meter stick. Lamp and detector axes are aligned. With the lamp off, readings at several positions establish an average ambient thermal radiation background. With the lamp on at a fixed supply setting, detector readings at different distances are compared after background subtraction. Between readings, a reflective shield prevents the detector warming; its shutter also protects the reference junction when idle. Moving the shutter can move the sensor, so fixed geometry matters. The manual's lamp limits must be followed.^[ref]

This protocol tests whether the background-corrected electric potential difference approximately follows the inverse-square law over a suitable distance range. It is a relative electromagnetic radiation measurement; those readings alone do not calibrate absorbed power in watts. The manual treats the filament as an approximate point source.^[ref]

For an absolute calibration, independently known absorbed power and a monitored reference temperature would be needed. A useful additional control is to repeat a fixed detector position before and after a distance sweep: disagreement reveals possible drift. These additions test the measurement chain rather than assuming that background subtraction fixes every error. A finite source, changing illuminated area, reflections, changing reference temperature, and insufficient settling can alter the measured dependence. In particular, the time constant in thermopile thermal response explains why a quick reading and a settled reading may differ. The detector infers its own absorber temperature difference; inferring the source's temperature additionally requires its emissivity, optical geometry and an appropriate thermal radiation model.

The thermocouple measuring junction joins A and B at the location whose temperature is to be inferred. Its own temperature is what the electrical measurement estimates. To infer a surrounding object's temperature, the junction must approach thermal equilibrium with that object: insufficient immersion, heat conduction along the wires, or a changing environment can keep the junction at another temperature. A stable electrical display alone does not establish that this thermal condition holds. The two-heat bath procedure and terminal-reversal controls under Seebeck effect provide the starting experiment; the practical issue here is the reference and conversion chain.

The thermocouple reference junction is the connection region where the two thermoelements meet the measurement leads. In ordinary copper-lead wiring there are two material transitions, A–Cu and B–Cu, rather than a second welded A–B junction. They must have a common known temperature $T_c$ for the simple expression $E(T_h,T_c)$ to apply. An ice-water heat bath can establish a nominal $0{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$ reference; cold-junction compensation instead measures $T_c$ locally. The word “cold” describes the reference role and imposes no requirement that $T_c<T_h$.

An isothermal terminal block keeps the two reference transitions and the reference thermometer at approximately the same temperature, while maintaining electrical insulation between the terminals. Thermal contact is required; an electrical short between A and B would bypass the signal. Merely using copper does not eliminate the Seebeck effect in the meter leads. If both homogeneous copper leads start at $T_c$ and end at a common meter-input temperature $T_m$, their contributions have equal magnitude and opposite sign around the measurement path:This cancellation uses matched endpoint temperatures and homogeneous lead material, rather than $S_{\mathrm{Cu}}=0$. A temperature gradient along each lead is allowed under these assumptions. If the two transitions are at different temperatures, one measured $T_c$ cannot generally correct both; unmatched connectors or wire inhomogeneity can introduce additional electromotive forces. The FP-TC-120 documentation explicitly locates the reference sensing in the terminal base or connector block and specifies isothermal versions of these assemblies.^[ref]

Cold-junction compensation converts a reading with reference temperature $T_c$ into the equivalent reading for a chosen standard reference. Define the thermocouple reference function $F(T)=E(T,0)$, where $0$ means $0{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$, not absolute zero. Additivity of the definite integral givesThe final inverse function requires a suitable one-to-one calibration interval. A terminal thermometer supplies $T_c$ independently; the raw thermocouple electric potential difference supplies only the difference of the two reference-function values. In general, first converting $V_{\mathrm{raw}}$ to a temperature and then adding $T_c$ is wrong, because the thermocouple reference function need not be linear. The SCC-TC manual explicitly adds the reference-equivalent voltage before its final voltage-to-temperature conversion.^[ref]

For a stipulated model only, take $S_A-S_B=40\mu V/K$ throughout the interval. No actual material pair is assigned this constant. Because degree Celsius differences have the same numerical size as kelvin differences,In this model $F(20)=0.8\mathrm{mV}$ and $F(80)=3.2\mathrm{mV}$. Adding the $0.8\mathrm{mV}$ correction produces $3.2\mathrm{mV}$, whose inverse calibration gives $80{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$. Applying the zero-reference calibration directly to $2.4\mathrm{mV}$ would instead display $60{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$.

Now physically change only the reference temperature to $30{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$, leaving the measuring junction at $80{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$. The raw reading becomes $2.0\mathrm{mV}$; the correction becomes $F(30)=1.2\mathrm{mV}$, so the corrected total stays $3.2\mathrm{mV}$. Physically changing the reference changes the measured electric potential difference. Adding a software correction changes its interpretation and leaves the raw reading intact. If the actual reference is $30{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$ but the software still assumes $20{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$, this model displays $70{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$.

An actual implementation in FP-TC-120 and cFP-TC-120 Operating Instructions by National Instruments (p. 7, Cold-Junction Compensation) uses terminal-mounted temperature sensors, reports their reading as “CJ Temperature”, and enables compensation in temperature mode but not voltage mode. This makes the distinction between a raw voltage readout and a compensated temperature readout observable. The specified reference-sensor range also produces an out-of-range indication: a calculated number outside a supported range is not a validated measurement.^[ref]

Thermocouple voltage calibration relates an actual assembled sensor's electromotive force to independently established junction temperatures. It must be distinguished from selecting a nominal letter-type conversion curve. In Thermocouples Calibrations Services by National Institute of Standards and Technology (opening method description and bath-calibration table), NIST describes comparison with a maintained reference thermocouple, comparison with a standard platinum resistance thermometer in controlled heat baths, and fixed-point calibration at the freezing points of zinc, aluminum, silver and gold on the International Temperature Scale of 1990. These are independent thermal references, unlike a test that checks only a voltage-input circuit.^[ref]

For a concrete electrical check, the SCC-TC guide describes shorting the input after 30 minutes of powered operation and adjusting its offset to a zero-voltage readout. Its separate calibrator procedure requires equal connection temperatures at the calibrator and module, measures the supplied voltage, converts it to temperature, and compares with the calibrator setting. Such an injected-signal test checks the readout chain; it does not expose a real measuring junction to an independently known bath temperature.^[ref]

Useful additional checks follow from the model: log the raw voltage, the reference temperature, and the final inferred temperature separately; hold $T_h$ stable while changing $T_c$ and test whether cold-junction compensation preserves the inferred $T_h$; compare against an independent thermometer at several stable heat bath settings. Check immersion and repeatability instead of assuming a steady display establishes thermal equilibrium. These are proposed diagnostic checks, not new experimental results. The equal-temperature and polarity controls are already described under Seebeck effect.

Limits arise separately from the thermocouple reference function, sensor-wire changes, thermal contact, terminal temperature differences, and the voltage-input circuit. In particular, the SCC-TC guide warns of connector-to-module temperature gradients and voltage drops caused by the fault-detection electric current flowing through lead electrical resistance.^[ref] A fitted curve or compensation algorithm cannot make all these errors vanish. No single accuracy is assigned to every thermocouple.

A thermocouple reference function gives the nominal thermoelectric electromotive force versus temperature for a specified material pair and reference temperature, conventionally $0{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$. Real Seebeck coefficients vary with temperature, sois generally nonconstant. A lookup calibration can use interpolation between tabulated values; a fitted calibration can use polynomials over stated intervals. Use the correct material type, units, reference and validity interval in both the forward and inverse conversions. The FP-TC-120 manual specifically requires the channel's thermocouple type to be configured and describes its use of NIST-175 reference characteristics.^[ref] A nominal reference curve is not evidence that an aged or inhomogeneous wire still follows it.

A local error estimate explains why the reference thermometer matters. If $\delta V$ is an additive voltage error and $\delta T_c$ is the error in the supplied reference temperature, differentiation of the compensation equation gives, for $F^{\prime }(T_h)\ne 0$,A small slope $F^{\prime }(T_h)$ magnifies voltage errors. In the stipulated $40\mu V/K$ model, a $40\mu \mathrm{V}$ offset gives a $1\mathrm{K}$ inferred-temperature error, and a $1\mathrm{K}$ reference error gives a $1\mathrm{K}$ inferred-temperature error. These are sensitivities of the chosen model, not universal performance figures for real sensors.

The Peltier effect is heat transfer associated with an electric current crossing a junction between materials with different Peltier coefficients. At fixed junction temperature, its contribution changes sign when the conventional current reverses. A junction can absorb heat from its surroundings for one direction and release it for the other. Joule heating, proportional to the square of the electric current, accompanies this transport but does not reverse sign. Consequently, observing a warm device alone does not identify the Peltier effect.

This makes the Peltier effect useful as an electrically controlled heat pump: reversing the supply can switch an object's thermal role without changing any plumbing. In thermoelectric cooling, however, the useful cooling is the junction's absorbed heat minus returning heat conduction and its share of Joule heating. Increasing electric current eventually makes cooling worse. The distinction between transported heat and net cooling is the central practical lesson of the thermoelectric cooler energy balance.

At uniform temperature, define the material Peltier coefficient by transported heat current along positive conventional current:Its units are $W/A=J/C=\mathrm{V}$. In one dimension, $q=\Pi j-\kappa dT/dx$, with electric current density $j$ and thermal conductivity $\kappa$. Here heat excludes the electrochemical potential contribution to total energy flux.^[ref]

Now orient positive conventional current $I$ from material A into material B, at a common junction temperature $T$. Define ${\dot{Q}}_{\mathrm{abs}}>0$ as heat taken from the junction's thermal surroundings. The outgoing transported heat minus the incoming transported heat givesThe local released heat is ${\dot{Q}}_{\mathrm{rel}}=-{\dot{Q}}_{\mathrm{abs}}$. Authors defining a junction coefficient by released heat therefore use the opposite sign. Exchanging A and B reverses the coefficient; reversing $I$ at fixed A and B reverses the junction's thermal response. An individual material coefficient and a junction difference are different quantities.

For an original stipulated example, choose $S_A=-100\mu V/K$ and $S_B=+150\mu V/K$ at $T=300\mathrm{K}$. The Kelvin thermoelectric relation gives ${\Pi }_A=-0.030\mathrm{V}$, ${\Pi }_B=+0.045\mathrm{V}$. A positive $2\mathrm{A}$ flowing A to B absorbs $(0.075\mathrm{V})(2\mathrm{A})=0.150\mathrm{W}$. A separate $0.010\Omega$ junction electrical resistance would dissipate $0.040\mathrm{W}$ for either direction. If all that dissipation heats the junction, its net absorbed power is $0.110\mathrm{W}$ forwards and $-0.190\mathrm{W}$ backwards. These numbers illustrate a chosen thermal accounting boundary, not measured material data or a universal allocation of contact heating.

With the Seebeck coefficient convention $dV=-SdT$ at zero electric current, and the transported-heat convention of Peltier coefficient, the Kelvin thermoelectric relation is$T$ is absolute temperature in kelvins; use consistent material references. This scalar linear response relation assumes local thermal equilibrium and reciprocal transport without time-reversal-breaking fields or order. Onsager reciprocal relations supply the symmetry; conservation of energy alone is insufficient. A magnetic field requires a reversed-field reciprocity comparison.^[ref]

In particular, the A-minus-B thermocouple coefficient in Seebeck effect is $S_A-S_B$, whereas absorbed junction heat for conventional current A to B uses $S_B-S_A$. There is no contradiction: terminal voltage order and crossing direction are separate choices. Multiplying a measured voltage by an absolute temperature without specifying these choices does not determine junction heating.

A short reciprocity calculation makes the factor $T$ visible. At a common reference temperature, write the local linear response with electrical driving field $\mathcal{E}=-\nabla V$ and heat flux $q$ asAt $j=0$, the Seebeck coefficient convention gives $S=L_{12}/(T{L}_{11})$. At $\nabla T=0$, the Peltier coefficient is $q/j=L_{21}/L_{11}$. Thus $L_{21}=L_{12}$ gives $\Pi =TS$. The chosen forces are conjugate to the fluxes in the local entropy production, $j\mathcal{E}/T+q(-\nabla T)/T^2$; arbitrary rescaling of just one force would spoil this argument.

The relation is local. Varying $S(T)$ permits distributed Thomson effect heating, with $\tau =TdS/dT$; the constant-coefficient model below omits it. Endpoint substitutions into a constant-property formula can therefore break its energy accounting.

An actual institutional protocol is CTU's Measurement of characteristics of a Peltier cell. Its cooling run uses a water container, an insulating cap and a current-limited supply; both face temperatures are recorded every minute while electric current is monitored. The apparatus includes a water-cooled exchanger, copper blocks and brass containers. The heating run resets the water near room temperature before reversing polarity. The handout specifies no thermometer type and reports no dataset. Its modular junction geometry is shown separately from the external thermal assembly.^[ref]

The following is a proposed quantitative extension. Keep the physical face labels fixed throughout reversal: c denotes the observed object's side and h the exchanger side, even if their actual temperatures change order. Use an independently read thermometer at each thermal contact and log the actual signed electric current and terminal electric potential difference. Maintain reproducible contact pressure and contact layers. A sensor in water measures water temperature, which need not equal the face temperature during a transient; verify mixing and contact equilibration before using it as a face reading. Do not interchange sensor leads when reversing the supply.

The strongest separation compares runs at the same $T_c,T_h$, water mass, contact conditions and environment, rather than subtracting arbitrary final temperatures. One option is short initial-rate runs after resetting the whole assembly to a reproducible state. Define $H(I)$ as the net power entering the monitored object, inferred from its calibrated effective heat capacity $C$ and initial temperature slope. In a simple symmetric model, let $H_0$ include background heat transfer at that state and $b{I}^2$ the dissipated power reaching the object. Thenwhere $a=\alpha T_c$ in the thermoelectric cooling model below. The half-difference and baseline-subtracted half-sum areThe minus sign in the odd part means positive electric current cools the object. The even part has to subtract the zero-current baseline: otherwise heat conduction and ambient exchange remain mixed with Joule heating. Independently measured heat capacity is essential for converting a thermal slope into watts; include the blocks, container and water that actually equilibrate on the measurement timescale.

Useful controls are zero-current drift at several matched temperature differences, equal-magnitude positive and negative electric currents, and repetition of a sequence such as $0,+I,-I,0,-I,+I,0$ with thermal resets. A calibrated small heater on the object can test the heat capacity and lost-heat correction independently. Check Joule heating in supply leads and contacts, bypass heat conduction through supports and wiring, and ambient convection and thermal radiation. Insulation reduces a leak; it does not establish that it is zero. Measure terminal power at the module boundary so lead losses are not mistaken for module heating.

An odd thermal response supports a reversible current-coupled contribution, but does not by itself locate all of it at one junction: the Thomson effect in nonuniform leads can also be odd. Sensor offsets, unequal current magnitudes, drifting thermal contacts and different junction temperatures during the two runs can contaminate both parts. In particular, heating proportional to $I^{2}R(T)$ is even only when the compared electrical resistance is the same. CTU's qualitative reversal illustrates switching heating and cooling; the matched-state controls above would be needed for a coefficient measurement.

Thermoelectric cooling uses the Peltier effect to remove heat from a load using electrical work. A typical thermoelectric module connects many pairs of different semiconductors electrically in a series circuit and thermally in parallel between two faces. For an idealized pair with $S_p>S_n$, positive conventional current crosses n to p at the cold bridge and p to n at the hot return. With common bridge material and isothermal contacts, the intervening metal contributions telescope: the net pair coefficient is $S_p-S_n$. For $N$ identical pairs define the module Seebeck coefficient $\alpha =N(S_p-S_n)>0$.

Choose fixed face temperatures $T_h\ge T_c>0$, $\Delta T=T_h-T_c$, module electrical resistance $R>0$ and open-circuit thermal conductance $K>0$. All three module parameters $\alpha ,R,K$ are constants over the chosen operating range. Positive $I$ is the orientation absorbing Peltier effect heat at c. Define $Q_c$ as net heat extracted from the cold reservoir per unit time, $Q_h$ as net heat delivered to the hot reservoir per unit time, and $P_{\mathrm{in}}$ as electrical power entering the module. Despite the conventional letters $Q_c,Q_h$, both denote power in watts, not accumulated energy. Ferrotec gives the corresponding single-stage equations and distinguishes module performance from bypass leaks.^[ref]

The chosen steady-state model isHere $U$ is the terminal voltage drop along positive electric current through the module. Its Seebeck effect term opposes the cooling supply. The cold Peltier effect term removes heat; Joule heating and returning heat conduction reduce the available cooling. At zero electric current, $Q_c=Q_h=-K\Delta T$: the passive leak warms c and removes heat from h, consistent with the stated signs. Subtracting the two face equations cancels heat conduction and gives the electrical power, an independent conservation of energy check.

The factor one half is an ideal-model result, not a universal rule for every contact. To see its origin, let $x$ run from cold to hot along a uniform equivalent leg of length $L$, cross-sectional area $A$, electrical resistivity $\rho$ and thermal conductivity $\kappa$. With constant coefficients, insulated sides and no Thomson effect, steady conservation of energy givesThe Fourier's law heat current in the positive $x$ direction is $-\kappa A{T}^{\prime }$. At $x=0$ it equals $-K\Delta T-I^{2}R/2$, and at $x=L$ it equals $-K\Delta T+I^{2}R/2$, using $K=\kappa A/L$ and $R=\rho L/A$. Adding the local transported heat current $\alpha TI$ gives the two face equations. Summing equivalent legs preserves this accounting. Nonuniform material properties, side losses or asymmetric contact dissipation require a revised model.

For an original toy module, stipulate $\alpha =0.040V/K$, $R=2.0\Omega$, $K=0.40W/K$, $T_c=280\mathrm{K}$ and $T_h=300\mathrm{K}$. At $I=3.0\mathrm{A}$,The coefficient of performance is defined here only for refrigeration with $Q_c>0$ and $P_{\mathrm{in}}>0$. The hot-side assembly must remove $37.0\mathrm{W}$, not just the extracted $16.6\mathrm{W}$. These are stipulated calculations, not measurements or a commercial module specification.

At the same fixed face temperatures but $I=-3.0\mathrm{A}$, the same boundary definitions give $Q_c=-50.6\mathrm{W}$, $Q_h=-35.0\mathrm{W}$, $U=-5.2\mathrm{V}$ and $P_{\mathrm{in}}=15.6\mathrm{W}$. The formerly cold face is now heated; the formerly hot reservoir supplies $35.0\mathrm{W}$. Still $Q_h-Q_c=15.6\mathrm{W}$. Reversal changes the linear terms, while $I^{2}R$ and the leak at fixed temperatures remain unchanged. Holding the old labels fixed makes this check meaningful.

The corresponding steady entropy production of the module is the outgoing reservoir entropy minus the incoming reservoir entropy:The Peltier effect terms cancel because they carry the same entropy $\alpha I$ at each end. This cancellation explains the reversible coupling; it does not make finite-resistance operation reversible. In the toy example the two positive contributions are approximately $0.06214$ and $0.001905W/K$, giving ${\dot{S}}_{\mathrm{gen}}=0.06405W/K$ for either current direction. In cooling operation, combining this inequality with the energy balance gives the Carnot refrigerator limit $\mathrm{COP}\le T_c/(T_h-T_c)$, equal to $14$ for these reservoir temperatures. A coefficient of performance above one would describe transported heat per electrical work, not the creation of energy.

At fixed face temperatures, differentiation of the thermoelectric cooler energy balance givesThus current chosen for maximum cooling power is not automatically current for maximum coefficient of performance. Cooling exists only when $(\alpha T_c{)}^2>2RK\Delta T$, and then only between the two positive rootsAt equality the parabola merely touches $Q_c=0$. For the toy module the interval is approximately $0.767<I<10.433\mathrm{A}$, with $I_{\ast }=5.60\mathrm{A}$ and $Q_{c,\max }=23.36\mathrm{W}$. At $12\mathrm{A}$, the object is heated even in the nominal cooling polarity: $Q_c=-17.6\mathrm{W}$. This mathematical interval supplies no permission to exceed an actual device's current or temperature ratings.

The fixed-face constraint matters. With fixed $T_h$ but a freely cooling object, $T_c$ must be solved from its heat load and leaks rather than held at $280\mathrm{K}$ while claiming an arbitrary temperature drop. For zero load and optimal current, the same model givesHere $Z$ has units ${\mathrm{K}}^{-1}$ and is a module parameter. The toy model gives $Z=0.0020{\mathrm{K}}^{-1}$ and $T_{c,\min }\approx 241.62\mathrm{K}$ when $T_h=300\mathrm{K}$. This is an ideal zero-load limit with stipulated constant properties; cooling a real load requires $Q_c$ above zero and reduces the attainable drop. Contact thermal resistance, a warming heat sink, external leaks and temperature-dependent coefficients further change the result. Electrical control is convenient, but conservation of energy still requires a thermal path that removes the extracted heat plus the electrical input.

The electromagnetic field tensor action differs from the component-gradient potential action by $(2{\mu }_0{)}^{-1}\int {\partial }^b{A}^a{\partial }_a{A}_b{d}^{4}x$. Integration by parts expresses this term as a boundary integral plus $(2{\mu }_0{)}^{-1}\int ({\partial }_a{A}^a{)}^2{d}^{4}x$. With the Lorenz gauge and fixed or vanishing boundary data, the two actions therefore differ only by a boundary term. Varying the component-gradient action without restriction gives the potential wave equations; the Lorenz condition must be supplied to recover all Maxwell equations.