©2019 L A Waygood

**Ohm’s Law** is one of the most fundamental ‘laws’ in electrical engineering, and most students and electricians believe that it is ‘universal’ —i.e. it applies to *all* conductors, circuits, and electronic components, under *all* circumstances.

In fact, this is NOT the case! Ohm’s Law is not ‘universal’, and there are more conductors, circuits, and electronic components that DON’T ‘obey’ Ohm’s Law, than there are that do!

There is also a widespread belief that Ohm’s Law can be summarised in the following simple equation:

$I=\frac{U}{R}$… where *I* represents current, *U* represents potential difference, and *R* represents resistance.

By extension, and based on this equation, many believe that Ohm’s Law can be expressed as, *‘The current passing through a circuit is directly-proportional to the applied voltage, and inversely-proportional to the resistance’*.

The above definition, in fact, is NOT the accepted definition for Ohm’s Law. In fact, Ohm’s Law makes no mention of **resistance** at all!

Ohm’s Law, then, is *by no means* a ‘universal’ law! Not many circuits or electronic components actually ‘obey’ Ohm’s Law! The equation, described above, does *not*, in fact, represent Ohm’s Law at all, but is *derived from the definition of the ohm!* So the above definition is quite incorrect!

So, what *is* the accepted definition of Ohm’s Law?

**Ohm’s Law** states that *‘the current flowing in a conductor is **directly-proportional** to the potential difference applied across its ends, providing the temperature and other physical characteristics remain constant.’*

### Ohm’s Law explained

In the 19th century, after conducting a great many experiments, a Rhinelander, teacher **Georg Simon Ohm**, concluded that under strictly-controlled conditions, *the current passing through a metal conductor was directly-proportional to the voltage applied across that conductor*.

Considering that there were no standard measuring instruments in those days (Ohm had to design his own) and neither were there any units of measurement for **current** or **voltage** (the ampere and volt didn’t exist at that time!), this was actually a remarkable experiment. And it was Ohm himself that coined the term, ‘**resistance**‘, to describe the opposition to the flow of current.

The ‘strictly-controlled conditions’ specified by Ohm included maintaining a **constant temperature** throughout his experiment. But it was not restricted to just this; it was also important, for example, not to **bend** or otherwise distort the conductors during the course of the experiment.

Repeating Ohm’s experiments in a school or college laboratory is very straightforward, and most students will have performed it at one time or other during their science lessons.

The simple experiment involves applying incrementally-increasing voltages across a conductor (or, more usually, a resistor of some kind), and recording the resulting value current for each increment. If the result of this experiment is a **straight-line graph** (of current against voltage) passing through the origin, then Ohm’s Law is confirmed. A straight-line graph is evidence of proportionality.

However, in *most* cases, the result will be a **curved line**. For example, if we were to use **tungsten** (the metal from which lamp filaments are manufactured), as the voltage applied to it increases, it gets hotter. As it gets hotter, its resistance increases, and the resulting graph will be a curve —evidence of a *lack* of proportionality, meaning that Ohm’s Law does NOT apply!

Those conductors or electronic devices that obey Ohm’s Law are, thus, describes as being ‘**linear**‘ or ‘**ohmic**‘, whereas those that don’t are described as ‘**non-linear**‘ or ‘**non-ohmic**‘. And there are FAR more ‘non-linear’ than there are ‘linear’.

For Ohm’s Law to be ‘universal’, **then current must remain proportional to voltage for variations in voltage**. In the case of tungsten, this is clearly not the case, so tungsten does NOT ‘obey’ Ohm’s Law.

And it’s NOT just tungsten that doesn’t obey Ohm’s Law. *Any* metal whose resistance is affected by temperature will not obey Ohm’s Law! And *most* electronic devices do not ‘obey’ Ohm’s Law, either. Take the following characteristic curve (operating curve) for a **tunnel diode**, as an extreme example:

Between points A-B, the graph is a **straight line**, so the device *obeys* Ohm’s Law (it’s ‘ohmic’) over that part of the curve. But, between points B-C, the line is **curved**, so it *no longer obeys* Ohm’s Law (it’s ‘non-ohmic’). Between points C-D, not only is it a curve, but it is a **negative curve**, so it *contradicts* Ohm’s Law —i.e. as the voltage *increases*, the corresponding current *decreases*! And, finally, between points D-E, the graph is a positive **curve** so, again, it *doesn’t obey Ohm’s Law*.

A tunnel diode is a rather extreme example of an electronic device that doesn’t obey Ohm’s Law. But other electronic devices, including simple diodes, also don’t fully-obey Ohm’s Law.

**So, Ohm’s Law is NOT a universal law. It does not apply to all devices nor does it apply in all circumstances. In fact, there are far more conductors and electronic devices that don’t obey Ohm’s Law than there are that do!**

This led to one correspondent (Glenn Elert, *‘The Physics Hypertextbook’*) to write: *‘Ohm’s Law isn’t a very serious law. It’s the “jaywalking” of physics! Sensible materials and devices obey it, but there are plenty of rogues out there that don’t!’*

Of course, the ratio of voltage to current (for a d.c. circuit, at least) is called ‘**resistance**‘. We are all familiar with the equation:

This equation is **always true**, whether a device obeys Ohm’s Law or not. But it ONLY applies *at any given point on the device’s characteristic curve*. It *cannot* be used to predict the resistance elsewhere on that same curve (unless, of course, it is a straight-line curve).

So, is it time to relegate Ohm’s Law to the dustbin of history? Possibly. But a revised definition might make it more accurate:

**Ohm’s Law** is only true *‘when* *the current flowing in a conductor remains **directly-proportional** to the potential difference applied across its ends, for variations in that potential difference.’*

Howdy! I’m at work surfing around your blog from my new iphone 4!Just wanted to say I love reading your blog and look forward to all your posts!Carry on the great work!

Thanks. If there are any other topics which might interest you, please let me know.

Thank you for your blog article.Really looking forward to read more. Will read on…

Just want to say your article is as astounding.

The clearness in your post is just spectacular and i could assume you are an expert on this subject.

Well with your permission let me to grab your feed to keep up to date

with forthcoming post. Thanks a million and please carry on the rewarding work.

After looking at a handful of the blog posts on your site, I seriously like your way of writing a blog. I saved it to my bookmark webpage list and will be checking back soon. Please check out my web site as well and let me know how you feel.

Can I simply say what a comfort to discover someone that truly knows what they are discussing over the internet. You certainly know how to bring a problem to light and make it important. More people ought to look at this and understand this side of the story. I can’t believe you are not more popular since you surely possess the gift.

Thank you for the excellent article

This is truly helpful, thanks.

This is valuable advice for my crowd, so I’ll link back to this post and you should probably get some new subscribers. It’s a step up from anything else out there about this topic. Thanks for the inspired point of view!

Spot on with this write-up, I actually think this amazing site needs far more attention. I’ll probably be returning to read through more, thanks for the information!

Having read this I thought it was really enlightening. I appreciate you taking the time and energy to put this informative article together. I once again find myself personally spending a significant amount of time both reading and posting comments. But so what, it was still worthwhile!

Hello, I believe your site may be having web browser compatibility problems. When I take a look at your site in Safari, it looks fine but when opening in I.E., it’s got some overlapping issues. I just wanted to provide you with a quick heads up! Besides that, wonderful site!

Thanks. I’ll check into that and see if I can sort it out.

Thanks, it’s very informative

Hey there! Quick question that’s totally off topic.Do you know how to make your site mobile friendly?My weblog looks weird when viewing from my iphone.I’m trying to find a template or plugin that mightbe able to correct this issue. If you have any suggestions, pleaseshare. Many thanks!

Sorry, I’m not an expert on web design.

Way cool! Some very valid points! I appreciate you writing this article and also the rest of the website is really good.

This is truly useful, thanks.

Good day! I simply wish to offer you a huge thumbs up for the excellent info you have right here on this post. I will be coming back to your site for more soon.

There’s certainly a lot to learn about this issue. I like all the points you made.

I like the article

Thanks, it is very informative

This website was… how do I say it? Relevant!! Finally I have found something

which helped me. Kudos!

Thanks for the terrific article

Good post! We are linking to this particularly great content on our website.

Keep up the great writing.

Honestly i’am not good at reading but your blog is really easy to understand, thanks for sharing…

Thanks so much for the blog article.Thanks Again. Really Great.

Nice blog! Is your theme custom made or did

you download it from somewhere? A design like yours with a

few simple adjustements would really make my

blog jump out. Please let me know where you got your design. Many thanks

Wow, marvelous blog format! How long have you been blogging for?

you made blogging glance easy. The overall glance of your website is excellent, let alone the content!

Great blog! I checked into a variety of your posts and was quite enlightened. I do have a question with regard to your post “Is Ohm’s Law ‘Universal’?”:

You had stated: I=UR

… where I represents current, U represents potential difference, and R represents resistance.

I was always taught E=IR where E is the potential difference (Voltage), I is the current (Amperes), and R is the resistance (Ohms). Regardless of the letters used, this is NOT the same equation. Your equation states that Voltage x Resistance = Current whereas mine states that Current x Resistance = Voltage. Please explain.

You are quite right, it should read I = U/R. For some reason, the ‘/’ is missing! I’ll correct that. Apologies for that. ‘U’ is the European symbol for potential difference.

Good job! You thoroughly included all important points in your post. I would like to read more by you. Do you write for any more blogs?

Sorry, no. Just this one.