Electrical conductivity of absolute vacuum

Discussion in 'Physics' started by HotFurnace, Apr 4, 2018.

  1. HotFurnace

    Thread Starter New Member

    Mar 31, 2018
    24
    1
    Hi,
    In a vacuum there's no particle to form a current (with the exception of capacitor charge&discharge, we are talking about DC current& static field here), so could the absolute vacuum conduct electricity? I heard that with high enough electric field, virtual particles could form and then a current can flow in absolute vacuum. How high this field is? And what happen with even higher electric field?
     
  2. crutschow

    Expert

    Mar 14, 2008
    23,081
    6,848
    Of course a current can flow in a vacuum.
    It occurs in all vacuum tubes (valves), else they wouldn't work.
    The electrons are emitted from the cathode and travel through the vacuum to the positively charged anode (Plate).
    No virtual particles needed.
     
    xox likes this.
  3. panic mode

    AAC Fanatic!

    Oct 10, 2011
    1,763
    533
    just ask yourself - what property of vacuum would stop something from traveling through it...
     
  4. ebp

    Well-Known Member

    Feb 8, 2018
    2,332
    812
    Can you have an "absolute vacuum" if you're spewing electrons into it?
     
  5. Papabravo

    Expert

    Feb 24, 2006
    12,275
    2,721
    Close enough for government work. The electron cloud has virtually no measurable effect on the vacuum. Electrons are vastly different things than oxygen and nitrogen molecules.
     
  6. crutschow

    Expert

    Mar 14, 2008
    23,081
    6,848
    I believe the definition in this case is nothing in the space until you introduce the electrons. :rolleyes:
     
  7. Papabravo

    Expert

    Feb 24, 2006
    12,275
    2,721
    Undt tell me what is the partial pressure of an electron cloud?
     
  8. nsaspook

    Expert

    Aug 27, 2009
    6,185
    6,967
    Forget all you think you know about virtual particles. The scientific definition of a quantity of electricity (archaic usage) is defined as the coulomb (charge), that's not by definition energy only a movement of charge. If what you mean is can absolute vacuum conduct (transport) electrical energy, then the answer is yes. In modern physics the word 'electricity' means a study of a thing.
     
  9. HotFurnace

    Thread Starter New Member

    Mar 31, 2018
    24
    1
    I mean a volume that have absolute no particles in it. Let's further assume that the cathode and anode are near absolute zero temperature so they hardly emit any electron after all.
    Of course vacuum could transport energy, but what i mean here, that is without the cathode emitting electron, without particles inside the volume considered, only the electric field strength is raised very slowly (for example bringing two plate closer), then could the plates lose charge?
     
  10. nsaspook

    Expert

    Aug 27, 2009
    6,185
    6,967
    Sure, you could have field emission at 0K (a QM process not a classical thermal emission) with absolute vacuum (field emission works better as vacuum quality increases) and eventually avalanche breakdown from that field emission with a strong electrostatic field.
    http://www.cas.unt.edu/~skg001/SKG Thesis/SKG Thesis Chapter 2.pdf


    Field emission used in semiconductors.

    http://ecee.colorado.edu/~bart/book/msfield.htm
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2018
    xox likes this.
  11. KL7AJ

    AAC Fanatic!

    Nov 4, 2008
    2,208
    427
    The lack of anything traveling through it. :)
     
  12. Papabravo

    Expert

    Feb 24, 2006
    12,275
    2,721
    I believe most particle beams will go right through a glass bulb with a vacuum inside.
     
  13. nsaspook

    Expert

    Aug 27, 2009
    6,185
    6,967
    It depends on the glass (doping in SiO2 layers on silicon wafers) but most cause beam loss when the particles collide with the glass. Most of the beam view ports use leaded glass to reduce X-ray emission from the Bremsstrahlung process if high energy charges strike the glass.



     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2018
  14. panic mode

    AAC Fanatic!

    Oct 10, 2011
    1,763
    533
    fair enough but i think this is either a common misconception or - my misunderstanding (lack of sleep can do that)

    lets elaborate my view, lets use A and B as substitutes.

    my understanding of original question is:
    "is it possible for A to travel through B?"

    you seem to understand it as follows:
    "is it possible for B to travel through B?"

    but A and B are not the same thing.

    So in this case:
    A = current (moving charged particles); B = vacuum

    but if you like, you can use any other analogy:
    A = deer; B = field
    A = bird; B = air
    A = fish; B = water
    A = bullet; B = bone
    etc.

    water ("pure" or "just water") is not the same as water with some fish swimming in there - just ask any fisherman.

    so why do we still call it "water"?

    because it is:
    a) MOSTLY water
    b) DIFFICULT (IMPOSSIBLE) to refer to it if we are going to use "detailed" naming such as "water with some fish, sand, one shark, lost sandal, sunk ship, bikini bottom, human remains, fish remains, algae, lost treasure ....".

    It is so much more practical and ingrained into our minds to just call it "water"

    So what is in B that prevents A from moving through B?

    the other point would be what exactly is "pure" vacuum or how would you define it? i don't think it can exist... even if we treat it as pure thought experiment (hypothetical pure vacuum)... after all even in such vacuum, there has to be some vacuum in it. ;-)

    and that's without going into quantum physics

    or how do you interpret it?
     
  15. nsaspook

    Expert

    Aug 27, 2009
    6,185
    6,967
    The OP's original question was unclear. After my query this was the actual question about initial vacuum conditions for conduction from charged plates.
    https://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/...ivity-of-absolute-vacuum.147425/#post-1256300
     
  16. bogosort

    Senior Member

    Sep 24, 2011
    380
    222
    The best model we have says that what we call space is really a set of quantum fields. "Space" is never empty. The vacuum state of a field is simply its ground state, its lowest energy state. It's no use trying to picture an electron moving through empty space; that image is unphysical. A ripple in the electron field is a better visualization.
     
  17. nsaspook

    Expert

    Aug 27, 2009
    6,185
    6,967
    A ripple in the electron field is not very useful when you need to calculate the needed electron density to neutralize a surface charge. Plain old particles moving in empty space works just fine for that. The best model is the one that works correctly and easily for your application.
     
  18. bogosort

    Senior Member

    Sep 24, 2011
    380
    222
    Sure, but the original question was theoretical in intent, asking specifically about empty space and rightfully being confused by such a notion.
     
    nsaspook likes this.
  19. BR-549

    AAC Fanatic!

    Sep 22, 2013
    4,936
    1,348
    I believe in clean space. It's the only thing that can fill eternity.

    The space anywhere near this universe is filthy with waste products, both field and matter.
     
    HotFurnace likes this.
  20. Darkstar

    Senior Member

    Sep 3, 2010
    117
    1
    In my chem & physics classes back in the 70's we were told the same thing about no current flow. The vacuum was a place that the electron was forbidden to occupy (I too thought of vacuum tubes). It wasn't long before quantum tunneling was discovered in which an electron could disappear from one location and reappear on the other side of a barrier without ever having been inside the forbidden barrier zone.

    Another way to have charges move through a perfect vacuum is to have 2 plates very close together. I forget the dimensions, but it is too small for an atom to fit between them so it has to be a perfect vacuum in that respect. However, it is not a perfect vacuum because it contains energy. If my memory serves me, this is called the zero point energy. It is everywhere. When the 2 plates mentioned are close enough, particles can form in the gap, produced by the energy contained therein. I forget specifically what particles they are but I think they have opposite charges so each can travel to one of the plates. This is supposed to be happening naturally all over space but with no place to go, the particles simply recombine and turn back into energy. The net result looks like nothing has happened but on a quantum level it has. I don't remember any mention of voltages on the plates being the energy source for the formation of the particle pairs, it was the natural energy in empty space. That's the way I remember it anyway.
     
Loading...