Talk:Wiedemann–Franz law

The following paragraph in the article is identical to text from the [Hyperphysics web page]:

Qualitatively, this relationship is based upon the fact that the heat and electrical transport both involve the free electrons in the metal. The thermal conductivity increases with the average particle velocity since this increases the forward transport of energy. The electrical conductivity, on the other hand, decreases while particle velocity increases because the collisions divert the electrons from forward transport of charge.

I don't know who copied who or whether Hyperphysics gave permission for Wikipedia to use the text. Is this copyright infringement?

--DelusionOfGrandeur 21:39, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

There is an inconsistency in the first two equations:  kappa in one and K in the other. Which is more common? Chris2crawford (talk) 12:58, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Observed violation of Wiedemann-Franz law
"Bristol physicists break 150-year-old law" - July 20, 2011


 * "A violation of one of the oldest empirical laws of physics has been observed by scientists at the University of Bristol. Their experiments on purple bronze, a metal with unique one-dimensional electronic properties, indicate that it breaks the Wiedemann-Franz Law. This historic discovery is described in a paper published today in Nature Communications."

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-07-bristol-physicists-year-old-law.html

-- 186.221.131.194 (talk) 23:11, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

WF Law
Apart from the mere mention of this law, there is absolutely no background material on how it was discovered by W. and F., that too, prior to the discovery of the electron. Pls include some historical material here, along with mention of Kittel etc. and their work. Why, pray, is L called the Lorenz number, and precisely, which Lorenz?

I have been trying to unearth some more history, but for some reason nothing seems to be available on the net. This does cover the subject of energy transport by electrons, at which level all three - electric, magnetic and thermal forms are essentially identical. Also try for some material at the quantum level to support these facts, since it is of fundamental importance, yet there is a distinct lack of information.

Improper name "Lorenz NUMBER"
In the article, it is said

Theoretically, the proportionality constant L, known as the Lorenz number, is equal to

L = κ σ T = π 2 3 ( k B e ) 2 = 2.44 × 10 − 8 W Ω K − 2.

So, Lorentz NUMBER is simply historical name, being wrong concerning terminological principles, and should be changed.

"Number" should be really number only, having neutral dimension 1. Example: Reynolds number. Any "characteristic number" from ISO/IEC 80000-11 Characteristic numbers

If it has a dimension (here unit: W Ω K − 2), then the term "number" is simply wrong, even being maybe frequently used, and must be changed for "coefficient".

E.g.: so called "wave number" (being no number, too) has been changed to "repetency" (or, at least, "wavenumber" written as one word without space, not to read "number" explicitely). See International Standards 80000 series, above quoted, and Directives ISO/IEC.

If the historical name goes against terminological principles, is must not be kept. JOb (talk) 08:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)