What came first, the coulomb or the amphere?

  • Thread starter Deep_Thinker97
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Coulomb
In summary, the base unit of ampere is not defined in terms of coulombs as it would create a circular system. Instead, NIST gives a definition based on current in a vacuum which relies on the base units for length, mass, and time. Other proposals have been made to redefine the ampere in terms of elementary charges per second. Metrology is based on what is possible and often uses a chain of sub-standards rather than the original basis of measurement. The definition of the meter and kilogram have also been improved upon to make them more portable.
  • #1
Deep_Thinker97
11
0
I'm struggling to understand why 'amps' is a base unit. An amp is defined as one coulomb per second, correct? Then surely it isn't a base unit! It clearly relies on the coulomb. Like, if the coulomb didnt exist, or the amp was discovered before the coulomb was discovered, what would the amp be defined as?
Likewise with the coulomb, right... One coulomb is defined as the amount of charge that passes a point in one second when the amphere is one. But the thing is, how can you know what an amphere is if you don't know what a coulomb is? How can you know what a coulomb is if you don't know what an amphere is? Surely one of the units had to have been created first, but how can that be if one cannot exist without the other?
I'm just very confused and very frustrated. I've been thinking about this for days and i still don't get it. Please please could someone just explain to me. It would be very much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The ampere is not defined in terms of coulombs, you are right that this would create a hopelessly circular system.

NIST gives us a different definition:

The ampere is that constant current which, if maintained in two straight parallel conductors of infinite length, of negligible circular cross section, and placed 1 meter apart in vacuum, would produce between these conductors a force equal to 2 x 10-7 Newton per meter of length.

This then depends on the base units for the dimensions of length, mass and time, which I believe are also carefully defined in order to avoid any interdependence.
 
  • #3
mikeph said:
The ampere is not defined in terms of coulombs, you are right that this would create a hopelessly circular system.

NIST gives us a different definition:

The ampere is that constant current which, if maintained in two straight parallel conductors of infinite length, of negligible circular cross section, and placed 1 meter apart in vacuum, would produce between these conductors a force equal to 2 x 10-7 Newton per meter of length.

This then depends on the base units for the dimensions of length, mass and time, which I believe are also carefully defined in order to avoid any interdependence.

Thank you!
I don't think about such things much.
I always think of an ampere as a volt divided by an ohm. :blushing:

I wonder if anyone has ever attempted to build an ammeter based on the definition.

(googles 10-7 Newtons)

hmmm... per yahoo answers, a grain of salt weighs ~6e-4 Newtons.

My guess is no.
 
  • #4
You have to e careful with Yahoo answers: The answers are voted on.
 
  • #5
OmCheeto said:
Thank you!
I don't think about such things much.
I always think of an ampere as a volt divided by an ohm. :blushing:

I wonder if anyone has ever attempted to build an ammeter based on the definition.

(googles 10-7 Newtons)

hmmm... per yahoo answers, a grain of salt weighs ~6e-4 Newtons.

My guess is no.

The Ohm is definitely not a base unit. It's just the ratio of PD and Current.

A current balance is the standard way to measure current from scratch, I believe.
 
  • #6
This is not the end of the story, though. Proposal have been made to re-define some base SI units, including the ampere. The new definition, if passed, will be in terms of the number of elementary charges per second. I understand the vote will happen next year.
 
  • #7
sophiecentaur said:
The Ohm is definitely not a base unit. It's just the ratio of PD and Current.

A current balance is the standard way to measure current from scratch, I believe.

But have you ever tried to picture a device to measure amperes based on the definition?
Can you imagine Fluke trying to sell 100 meter long(infinity is a long way), 1 meter diameter vacuum tubes, with little springs and levers to measure the sub-micro Newton forces?

Hmmm... Come to think of it.

337px-Current_balance.jpg

Ampere balance ... in the National Museum of Nature and Science, Tokyo, Japan.

That probably wouldn't fit on my tool-belt either.

And looking at the definition of a volt, I don't have a clue how to even start building a volt meter.

A joule per coulomb? Who the hell is going to count out that many electrons?!

I think I'm starting to understand the OP's confusion.
 
  • #8
OmCheeto said:
And looking at the definition of a volt, I don't have a clue how to even start building a volt meter.

As soon as you figure out a way to create a meter stick from the definition of the SI meter, it will be all downhill.
 
  • #9
voko said:
As soon as you figure out a way to create a meter stick from the definition of the SI meter, it will be all downhill.

:bugeye:

Thank you voko.

And on that note, I will recuse myself from this thread.

-----------------------
ps. My thanks to everyone involved in this thread. I greatly appreciate being reminded of how little I really know. Seriously. :smile:
pps. And yes, I looked up the definition of a Candela. Holy [expletive deleted]!
 
  • #10
Afaik, the SI definition of the Amp is based on the Current Balance.
Metrology is all a matter of the 'possible'. In the end, everything hangs on everything else and some quantities are easier to measure than others. Time and frequency can be measured with greater accuracy / precision / repeatability than other quantities so, where possible, they are used in the definitions of other quantities.
Before poking fun at the way some units are defined and measured, you need to remember that we seldom, if ever, actually use the 'defined method' as a basis for measurement. We use a chain of sub-standards. Any piece of lab equipment will probably not use the original measurement basis. We accept that quite happily.

The meter, based on a length of platinum in Paris, is a bit lame as a standard because someone on Mars will not have access to it. A definition based on the wavelength of an atomic energy transition is far better because all atomic isotopes behave the same (under the same conditions) and it is totally 'portable'. Basing the kg on a lump of platinum is also a bit lame. Much better to 'count out' a given number of atoms of one isotope, for repeatability, but the details are not straightforward.
 
  • #11
Thanks everyone, this helped a lot :)
 

Related to What came first, the coulomb or the amphere?

1. What is the difference between a coulomb and an ampere?

A coulomb is a unit of electric charge, while an ampere is a unit of electric current. A coulomb is defined as the amount of charge carried by a current of one ampere in one second.

2. Which unit came first, the coulomb or the ampere?

The ampere was defined and named before the coulomb. The unit was named after French physicist André-Marie Ampère in 1881. The coulomb was not named until 1881, when it was defined as the quantity of electricity transferred by one ampere in one second.

3. Can you convert between coulombs and amperes?

Yes, you can convert between coulombs and amperes by using the equation Q = I x t, where Q is charge in coulombs, I is current in amperes, and t is time in seconds.

4. How are coulombs and amperes related?

Coulombs and amperes are related through the definition of electric current. One coulomb is equal to one ampere-second (As), meaning that one coulomb of electric charge will flow through a conductor for one second if the current is 1 ampere.

5. Which unit is more commonly used, coulombs or amperes?

Both units are commonly used in different contexts. Coulombs are more commonly used when discussing electric charge or energy, while amperes are more commonly used when discussing electric current. Both units are essential in understanding and working with electricity.

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
16
Views
51K
Replies
3
Views
22K
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Back
Top