[Letter to the Editor]

The commentor takes issue with various points made in the original article by P.R. Bhattacharjee (ibid., vol.32, no.2, pp.24,26, April 2013). In particular she feels that the most fundamental flaw in Bhattacharjee's scheme is that defining 'current' in a direction perpendicular to the flow of charge becasue this redefinition breaks the symmetry of the Maxwell equations. She feels Bhattacharjee's article does nothing to clear up any confusion and offers no new insight. Rather, the author confuses lumped and vectorial models of electromagnetics, real vectors, and psuedovectors and only muddies the waters. In replying Bhattacharjee notes that the work described in the original article had been an extension of the previous article "Discovering the Vectorial Nature of Electric Current," which appeared in the vol. 3, 2012 issue of the International Journal of Physical and Mathematical Sciences (IJPMS), a peer-reviewed journal published by the International Centre of Cultural Inventory (icoci.org). It was clearly stated in the earlier 2012 published paper in IJPMS that the said work deals with a debatable issue and what has been reported in it is exclusively related to the feeling of the author with respect to the long-running misleading concept about electric current. It has also been mentioned in that paper that the said study reflects a discovery of the real truth, which has been overlooked so far and, as such, deserves special attention. The author feels the newly introduced vectorial portrayal of electric current is very much clear, leaving no room for confusion and has rationality with the convention used in regard to the direction of unit positive normal in defining vector area in vector calculus. Also, such a direction for the vectorial current follows from the well-known Ampere's theorem of equivalent magnetic shell