Vacuum permittivity

The physical constant ε₀, commonly called the vacuum permittivity, permittivity of free space or electric constant, is an ideal, (baseline) physical constant, which is the value of the absolute dielectric permittivity of classical vacuum. Its value is

ε₀ = 8.854 187 817... × 10⁻¹² F·m⁻¹ (farads per metre).

It is the capability of the vacuum to permit electric field lines. This constant relates the units for electric charge to mechanical quantities such as length and force.^[1] For example, the force between two separated electric charges (in the vacuum of classical electromagnetism) is given by Coulomb's law:

$\ F_\text{C} = \frac{1} {4 \pi \varepsilon_0} \frac{q_1 q_2} {r^2}$

where q₁ and q₂ are the charges, and r is the distance between them. Likewise, ε₀ appears in Maxwell's equations, which describe the properties of electric and magnetic fields and electromagnetic radiation, and relate them to their sources.

Value

The value of ε₀ is currently defined by the formula^[2]

$\varepsilon_0 =\frac {1}{\mu_0 c^2}$

where c is the defined value for the speed of light in classical vacuum in SI units,^[3] and μ₀ is the parameter that international Standards Organizations call the "magnetic constant" (commonly called vacuum permeability). Since μ₀ has the defined value 4π × 10⁻⁷ H⋅m⁻¹,^[4] and c has the defined value 299792458 m⋅s⁻¹,^[5] it follows that ε₀ has a defined value given approximately by

ε₀ ≈ 8.854187817620... × 10⁻¹² F⋅m⁻¹ (or A²⋅s⁴⋅kg⁻¹⋅m⁻³ in SI base units, or C²⋅N⁻¹⋅m⁻² or C⋅V⁻¹⋅m⁻¹ using other SI coherent units).^[6][7]

The historical origins of the electric constant ε₀, and its value, are explained in more detail below.

Redefinition of the SI units

Under the proposals to redefine the ampere as a fixed number of elementary charges per second,^[8] the electric constant would no longer have an exact fixed value. The value of the electron charge would become a defined number, not measured, making μ₀ a measured quantity. Consequently, ε₀ also would not be exact. As before, it would be defined by the equation ε₀ = 1/(μ₀c²), but now with a measurement error related to the error in μ₀, the magnetic constant. This measurement error can be related to that in the fine-structure constant α:

$\varepsilon_0 = \frac {1}{\mu_0 c^2} = \frac {e^2}{2\alpha h c}\ ,$

with e the exact elementary charge, h the exact Planck constant, and c the exact speed of light in vacuum. Here use is made of the relation for the fine-structure constant:

$\alpha=\frac {\mu_0 c e^2}{2 h } \ .$

The relative uncertainty in the value of ε₀ therefore would be the same as that for the fine-structure constant, currently 6.8×10⁻¹⁰.^[6]

Terminology

Historically, the parameter ε₀ has been known by many different names. The terms "vacuum permittivity" or its variants, such as "permittivity in/of vacuum",^[9][10] "permittivity of empty space",^[11] or "permittivity of free space"^[12] are widespread. Standards Organizations worldwide now use "electric constant" as a uniform term for this quantity,^[6] and official standards documents have adopted the term (although they continue to list the older terms as synonyms).^[13][14]

Another historical synonym was "dielectric constant of vacuum", as "dielectric constant" was sometimes used in the past for the absolute permittivity.^[15][16] However, in modern usage "dielectric constant" typically refers exclusively to a relative permittivity ε/ε₀ and even this usage is considered "obsolete" by some standards bodies in favor of relative static permittivity.^[14][17] Hence, the term "dielectric constant of vacuum" for the electric constant ε₀ is considered obsolete by most modern authors, although occasional examples of continuing usage can be found.

As for notation, the constant can be denoted by either $\varepsilon_0\,$ or $\epsilon_0\,$, using either of the common glyphs for the letter epsilon.

Historical origin of the parameter ε₀

As indicated above, the parameter ε₀ is a measurement-system constant. Its presence in the equations now used to define electromagnetic quantities is the result of the so-called "rationalization" process described below. But the method of allocating a value to it is a consequence of the result that Maxwell's equations predict that, in free space, electromagnetic waves move with the speed of light. Understanding why ε₀ has the value it does requires a brief understanding of the history.

Rationalization of units

The experiments of Coulomb and others showed that the force F between two equal point-like "amounts" of electricity, situated a distance r apart in free space, should be given by a formula that has the form

$F = \; k_{\mathrm{e}} \frac{Q^2}{r^2},$

where Q is a quantity that represents the amount of electricity present at each of the two points, and k_e is Coulomb's constant. If one is starting with no constraints, then the value of k_e may be chosen arbitrarily.^[18] For each different choice of k_e there is a different "interpretation" of Q: to avoid confusion, each different "interpretation" has to be allocated a distinctive name and symbol.

In one of the systems of equations and units agreed in the late 19th century, called the "centimetre–gram–second electrostatic system of units" (the cgs esu system), the constant k_e was taken equal to 1, and a quantity now called "gaussian electric charge" q_s was defined by the resulting equation

$F = \frac{{q_{\text{s}}}^2}{r^2}.$

The unit of gaussian charge, the statcoulomb, is such that two units, a distance of 1 centimetre apart, repel each other with a force equal to the cgs unit of force, the dyne. Thus the unit of gaussian charge can also be written 1 dyne^1/2 cm. "Gaussian electric charge" is not the same mathematical quantity as modern (rmks) electric charge and is not measured in coulombs.

The idea subsequently developed that it would be better, in situations of spherical geometry, to include a factor 4π in equations like Coulomb's law, and write it in the form:

$F = \; k'_{\mathrm{e}} \frac{{q'_{\text{s}}}^2}{4 \pi r^2}.$

This idea is called "rationalization". The quantities q_s' and k_e' are not the same as those in the older convention. Putting k_e'=1 generates a unit of electricity of different size, but it still has the same dimensions as the cgs esu system.

The next step was to treat the quantity representing "amount of electricity" as a fundamental quantity in its own right, denoted by the symbol q, and to write Coulomb's Law in its modern form:

$\ F = \frac{1}{4 \pi \varepsilon_0} \frac{q^2}{r^2}.$

The system of equations thus generated is known as the rationalized metre–kilogram–second (rmks) equation system, or "metre–kilogram–second–ampere (mksa)" equation system. This is the system used to define the SI units.^[19] The new quantity q is given the name "rmks electric charge", or (nowadays) just "electric charge". Clearly, the quantity q_s used in the old cgs esu system is related to the new quantity q by

$\ q_{\text{s}} = \frac{q}{\sqrt{4 \pi \varepsilon_0}}.$

Determination of a value for ε₀

One now adds the requirement that one wants force to be measured in newtons, distance in metres, and charge to be measured in the engineers' practical unit, the coulomb, which is defined as the charge accumulated when a current of 1 ampere flows for one second. This shows that the parameter ε₀ should be allocated the unit C²⋅N⁻¹⋅m⁻² (or equivalent units – in practice "farads per metre").

In order to establish the numerical value of ε₀, one makes use of the fact that if one uses the rationalized forms of Coulomb's law and Ampère's force law (and other ideas) to develop Maxwell's equations, then the relationship stated above is found to exist between ε₀, μ₀ and c₀. In principle, one has a choice of deciding whether to make the coulomb or the ampere the fundamental unit of electricity and magnetism. The decision was taken internationally to use the ampere. This means that the value of ε₀ is determined by the values of c₀ and μ₀, as stated above. For a brief explanation of how the value of μ₀ is decided, see the article about μ₀.

Permittivity of real media

By convention, the electric constant ε₀ appears in the relationship that defines the electric displacement field D in terms of the electric field E and classical electrical polarization density P of the medium. In general, this relationship has the form:

$\mathbf{D} = \varepsilon_0 \mathbf{E} + \mathbf{P}.$

For a linear dielectric, P is assumed to be proportional to E, but a delayed response is permitted and a spatially non-local response, so one has:^[20]

$\mathbf D (\mathbf r , \ t) = \int_{-\infty}^t dt' \int d^3\mathbf r' \ \varepsilon (\mathbf r, \ t ; \mathbf r' ,\ t') \mathbf E(\mathbf r', \ t').$

In the event that nonlocality and delay of response are not important, the result is:

$\mathbf{D} = \varepsilon \mathbf{E} = \varepsilon_{\text{r}} \varepsilon_0 \mathbf{E}$

where ε is the permittivity and ε_r the relative static permittivity. In the vacuum of classical electromagnetism, the polarization P = 0, so ε_r = 1 and ε = ε₀.

See also

• Casimir effect
• Relative permittivity
• Coulomb's law
• Electromagnetic wave equation
• ISO 31-5
• Mathematical descriptions of the electromagnetic field
• Sinusoidal plane-wave solutions of the electromagnetic wave equation
• Wave impedance

Notes

1. "Electropedia: International Electrotechnical Vocabulary (IEC 60050)". Geneva: International Electrotechnical Commission. Retrieved 2015-03-26. |contribution= ignored (help).
2. The exact numerical value is found at: "Electric constant, ε₀". NIST reference on constants, units, and uncertainty: Fundamental physical constants. NIST. Retrieved 2012-01-22. This formula determining the exact value of ε₀ is found in Table 1, p. 637 of PJ Mohr, BN Taylor, DB Newell (April–June 2008). "Table 1: Some exact quantities relevant to the 2006 adjustment in CODATA recommended values of the fundamental physical constants: 2006" (PDF). Rev Mod Phys 80 (2): 633–729. arXiv:0801.0028. Bibcode:2008RvMP...80..633M. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.80.633.
3. Quote from NIST: "The symbol c is the conventional symbol for the speed of light in vacuum. " See NIST Special Publication 330, p. 18
4. See the last sentence of the NIST definition of ampere.
5. See the last sentence of the NIST definition of meter.
6. Mohr, Peter J.; Taylor, Barry N.; Newell, David B. (2008). "CODATA Recommended Values of the Fundamental Physical Constants: 2006". Rev. Mod. Phys. 80 (2): 633–730. arXiv:0801.0028. Bibcode:2008RvMP...80..633M. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.80.633. Direct link to value..
7. A summary of the definitions of c, μ₀ and ε₀ is provided in the 2006 CODATA Report: CODATA report, pp. 6–7
8. "On the possible future revision of the International System of Units, the SI" (PDF). Sèvres, France: International Bureau for Weights and Measures. 21 Oct 2011. |contribution= ignored (help) It is not expected to be adopted until some prerequisite conditions are met, and in any case not before 2014. See "Possible changes to the international system of units". IUPAC Wire (International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry) 34 (1). January–February 2012.
9. SM Sze & Ng KK (2007). "Appendix E". Physics of semiconductor devices (Third ed.). New York: Wiley-Interscience. p. 788. ISBN 0-471-14323-5.
10. RS Muller, Kamins TI & Chan M (2003). Device electronics for integrated circuits (Third ed.). New York: Wiley. Inside front cover. ISBN 0-471-59398-2.
11. FW Sears, Zemansky MW & Young HD (1985). College physics. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley. p. 40. ISBN 0-201-07836-8.
12. B. E. A. Saleh and M. C. Teich, Fundamentals of Photonics (Wiley, 1991)
13. International Bureau of Weights and Measures (2006). "The International System of Units (SI)" (PDF). p. 12.
14. Braslavsky, S.E. (2007). "Glossary of terms used in photochemistry (IUPAC recommendations 2006)" (PDF). Pure and Applied Chemistry 79 (3): 293–465; see p. 348. doi:10.1351/pac200779030293.
15. "Naturkonstanten". Freie Universität Berlin.
16. King, Ronold W. P. (1963). Fundamental Electromagnetic Theory. New York: Dover. p. 139.
17. IEEE Standards Board (1997). "IEEE Standard Definitions of Terms for Radio Wave Propagation" (PDF). p. 6.
18. For an introduction to the subject of choices for independent units, see John David Jackson (1999). "Appendix on units and dimensions". Classical electrodynamics (Third ed.). New York: Wiley. pp. 775 et seq.. ISBN 0-471-30932-X.
19. International Bureau of Weights and Measures. "The International System of Units (SI) and the corresponding system of quantities".
20. Jenö Sólyom (2008). "Equation 16.1.50". Fundamentals of the physics of solids: Electronic properties. Springer. p. 17. ISBN 3-540-85315-4.