Register to reply

Charged particle at relativistic velocity

by Privalov
Tags: charged, particle, relativistic, velocity
Share this thread:
Privalov
#1
Jul24-08, 06:05 PM
P: 24
Imagine a charged particle moving in vacuum with relativistic velocity. It emits electromagnetic wave with some known energy. This energy can be detected and used somewhere else. I guess this energy should come from particle’s kinetic energy, thus particle should slowly decelerate over time.

However, General Relativity states all inertial points of view are identical. If an observer moves near the particle with the same constant speed, he will believe particle stays still and emits no energy. From his point of view, particle should not decelerate.

Will the particle decelerate, after all?

I came up with the following assumption to resolve this paradox: if radio detector exists somewhere nearby, moving electrons n it’s antenna will attract to the moving particle by electromagnetic force, so particle will decelerate. If there is no radio detector nearby, particle will keep its speed.

However, then comes the next question: electromagnetic wave is a photon. Photon can be seen as a particle. Logically, it can not exist for some observers and does not exist for another observer.
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
World's largest solar boat on Greek prehistoric mission
Google searches hold key to future market crashes
Mineral magic? Common mineral capable of making and breaking bonds
George Jones
#2
Jul24-08, 07:07 PM
Mentor
George Jones's Avatar
P: 6,231
A charged particle moving at constant velocity with respect to any inertial frame doesn't radiate.
cesiumfrog
#3
Jul24-08, 08:49 PM
P: 2,050
Quote Quote by George Jones View Post
A charged particle moving at constant velocity with respect to any inertial frame doesn't radiate.
That's going a bit far for the GR forum, do you deny a charged moon would radiate?

On topic, a charge with constant velocity will certainly cause a stationary observer to experience a changing electromagnetic field, and hence induce acceleration of charges in a stationary antenna (i.e., radiation of energy). Presumably there will also be a Lenz back-reaction such that it requires work to hold the charged particle at constant velocity.

Privalov
#4
Jul25-08, 08:29 PM
P: 24
Charged particle at relativistic velocity

Quote Quote by cesiumfrog View Post
On topic, a charge with constant velocity will certainly cause a stationary observer to experience a changing electromagnetic field, and hence induce acceleration of charges in a stationary antenna (i.e., radiation of energy). Presumably there will also be a Lenz back-reaction such that it requires work to hold the charged particle at constant velocity.
OK, so my guess was right. Now, can photon exist in some inertial frame of reference and do not exist in another? Is photon the same thing, as electromagnetic wave?

Quote Quote by George Jones
A charged particle moving at constant velocity with respect to any inertial frame doesn't radiate.
Quote: "According to Maxwell's equations, a time-varying electric field generates a magnetic field and vice versa."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_waves
Vanadium 50
#5
Jul25-08, 09:42 PM
Mentor
Vanadium 50's Avatar
P: 16,171
Quote Quote by cesiumfrog View Post
That's going a bit far for the GR forum, do you deny a charged moon would radiate?
A moon doesn't have constant velocity. It may have constant speed, but not velocity.

Quote Quote by cesiumfrog View Post
hence induce acceleration of charges in a stationary antenna (i.e., radiation of energy).
Yes, but when you add these other charges, you change the problem from the OP's single charge in vacuum. Different problem, different answer.
MeJennifer
#6
Jul25-08, 09:47 PM
P: 2,043
Quote Quote by Vanadium 50 View Post
A moon doesn't have constant velocity. It may have constant speed, but not velocity.
Since we are discussing special and general relativity here I think you should explain why you think that the moon's velocity is not constant.
HallsofIvy
#7
Jul26-08, 04:47 AM
Math
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
Thanks
PF Gold
P: 39,344
Quote Quote by MeJennifer View Post
Since we are discussing special and general relativity here I think you should explain why you think that the moon's velocity is not constant.
Because it is not going in a straight line at constant speed, for God's sake!
MeJennifer
#8
Jul26-08, 04:57 AM
P: 2,043
Quote Quote by HallsofIvy View Post
Because it is not going in a straight line at constant speed, for God's sake!
You seem to be talking about Newtonian mechanics not general relativity.
Vanadium 50
#9
Jul26-08, 10:14 AM
Mentor
Vanadium 50's Avatar
P: 16,171
The OP had a simple misconception - confusing acceleration and velocity for when charges radiate. George Jones cleared this up. Why muddy the waters with talk of GR and additional charge distributions?


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Charged particle beam General Physics 8
Acceleration of a Charged Particle Introductory Physics Homework 1
Motion of a charged particle Advanced Physics Homework 3
Hamiltonian of charged particle Advanced Physics Homework 2
Charged particle oscillation Quantum Physics 9