| New Reply |
Imagine a solid, non-conducting cylinder at rest in IRF K, with a |
Share Thread |
| Jun27-11, 10:31 AM | #1 |
|
Blog Entries: 1
|
Imagine a solid, non-conducting cylinder at rest in IRF K, with a
Imagine a solid, non-conducting cylinder at rest in IRF K, with a positive spherical charge centered on one end and a negative spherical charge on the other end. Each charge experiences an electric force toward the other. The cylinder is compressed, but there is no torque.
Let us say that the cylinder’s axis makes an angle, A, with the x-axis, such that 0<A<90 degrees. Viewed from frame K’, each charge experiences a net electromagnetic (Lorentz) force that does not point along the cylinder’s axis. Together the charges exert a nonzero torque about the cylinder’s midpoint. Yet in K’ (as in K) the cylinder does not rotate. What counteracts the Lorentz torque in K’? Bonus question: why don’t the charges slide/roll off the cylinder ends in K’? |
| Jun27-11, 10:56 AM | #2 |
|
It doesn't seem like you defined K'. A diagram would really help here.
|
| Jun27-11, 10:58 AM | #3 |
|
|
Assuming that K' is moving relative to K along the x-axis, then K' will see a magnetic field that cancels the torque. I haven't got time to do the calculation, but that's the usual answer.
|
| Jun27-11, 07:46 PM | #4 |
|
Blog Entries: 1
|
Imagine a solid, non-conducting cylinder at rest in IRF K, with a |
| Jun27-11, 09:16 PM | #5 |
|
Blog Entries: 1
|
|
| Jun28-11, 11:27 AM | #6 |
|
|
|
| Jun28-11, 02:21 PM | #7 |
|
Blog Entries: 1
|
|
| Jun28-11, 03:01 PM | #8 |
|
Recognitions:
|
I haven't read this closely, and I can't quite envision the situation, but the general description sounds a lot like the classic "lever paradox", first proposed by Lewis and Tollman,and related to the Trouton-Noble experiment with the rotation of a charged capacitor.
There's a paper at http://arxiv.org/abs/0805.1196 with a bibliography, I'm not terribly sure of this paper's approach yet (the paper does appear to be peer-reviewed). However, it's different from the papers I've read in the past. So as usual, let the reader beware. |
| Jun30-11, 04:11 PM | #9 |
|
Blog Entries: 1
|
Thanks, Pervect. I have checked out the link and will spend more time thinking about the whole thing. I was aware of the Trouton-Noble experiment.
|
| Jun30-11, 05:13 PM | #10 |
|
Recognitions:
|
The standard derivation that internal forces don't contribute to angular momentum requires that the force between any pair of particles lies along a line connecting them, if you go back and read the fine print in your standard physics textbook (i.e. Goldstein, for example).
This assumption becomes a bit problematical in the context of SR. I've seen various discussions of the issue but I'm not really super-happy with any of them. |
| Jun30-11, 07:21 PM | #11 |
|
As an example, if you start a dipole spinning, its spin will slow down as it dissipates its energy and angular momentum into the energy and angular momentum of the electromagnetic waves it radiates. I don't know if this is quite what the OP had in mind. |
| Jul4-11, 05:47 PM | #13 |
|
|
|
| New Reply |
Similar discussions for: Imagine a solid, non-conducting cylinder at rest in IRF K, with a
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | Replies | ||
| The sum of torques is not the sum of torques? | Introductory Physics Homework | 8 | ||
| summation of torques | Introductory Physics Homework | 1 | ||
| Torques | Introductory Physics Homework | 1 | ||
| CW/CCW Torques | Introductory Physics Homework | 5 | ||
| HELP PLEASE Torques | Introductory Physics Homework | 3 | ||