| Thread Closed |
lorentz force |
Share Thread |
| Aug29-05, 01:07 AM | #1 |
|
|
lorentz force
hi,
this is a challenging question there are two charges q1 and q2 .At some instant of time first one is moving towards the second one with a uniform speed v1 and q2 is moving perpendicular to the line joining q1 and q2 with a speed v2. calculate forces between them ie F12 and F21. Are they equal and opposite .if not what happens to newtons third law
|
| Aug29-05, 01:43 AM | #2 |
|
|
lorentz force implies a magnetic field... is there no mention of a magnetic field in the question?
|
| Aug29-05, 03:50 PM | #3 |
|
Recognitions:
|
Sure, Quasar - there's a non-zero B-field around Q2 at the location of Q1,
and there's a changing E-field at the location of Q2 caused by moving Q1. Great Question! Thanks, Shahidkilji |
| Aug29-05, 05:12 PM | #4 |
|
|
lorentz force
around Q2? What does it look like exactly? What equation gives the form of this field?
|
| Aug29-05, 08:15 PM | #5 |
|
Recognitions:
|
The B-field surrounds a moving charge, transverse to its velocity.
Biot-Savart Law has B = (mu_0/4pi) (q v_vec x r_hat)/r^2 . The cross-product leads to |B| = (mu_0/4pi)(qv/r^2)sin(theta) (right-hand-thumb along qv_vec, fingers wrap along B-field), with theta = the polar angle from the forward direction (v_vec). Roughly, B looks like loops encircling the charge as it moves. (To purists who may object that Biot-Savart is incorrect: (this is the *College HW* forum! Yes, Biot-Savart is written (this way so that Ampere's Law can be derived from it, and (of course Ampere's Law must be augmented with a dB/dt term. (That's why I thought this was a great question! So, using Biot-Savart only, B (at location 2 by q1) = 0 while B (at location 1 caused by q2) is nonzero. |
| Aug30-05, 12:06 AM | #6 |
|
|
so u have concluded that mag field due to q1 on q2 is zero but vice versa is not true . therefore lorentz force due to q1 on q2 will be zero but due to q2 on q1 will not be zero . Is it not violation of newtons third law.
|
| Aug30-05, 02:43 AM | #7 |
|
Recognitions:
|
magnetic field at q1 due to q2 is not constant. did you accounted the electric field at q1 due to changing magnetic field of q2 at q1?
|
| Aug30-05, 10:23 PM | #8 |
|
|
[tex]\vec{B}(\vec{r}) = \frac{\mu_0}{4\pi}I \int\frac{d\vec{r}'\times (\vec{r}-\vec{r}')}{|\vec{r}-\vec{r}'|^3}[/tex] Earlier on the same page, he also say that a moving point charge cannot be considered a steady current. Hence Biot-Savard law and moving charges have nothing to together. At least that'd what I concluded.
|
| Aug30-05, 10:40 PM | #9 |
|
|
but current is ultimately made up of moving charges only .so why biot savarts law cant be applied for moving charge. can u say an electron moving in orbit doesnt generate magnetic field at the centre?
|
| Aug31-05, 02:55 AM | #10 |
|
|
[tex]\vec{B}(\vec{r}) = \frac{mu_0}{4\pi} \frac{q( \vec{v} \times (\vec{r}-\vec{r}'))}{|\vec{r}-\vec{r}'|^3} [/tex] where [itex]\vec{r}'[/itex] denotes the position of the charge. That's pretty darn cool, and a real shame (on David J. and my teacher!) that I've been through an E&M class and didn't know of this elementary fact. I also suppose that this formula is only an approximation for then v << c, right? The real formula probably takes the delay into account.
|
| Aug31-05, 01:18 PM | #11 |
|
|
|
| Aug31-05, 08:45 PM | #12 |
|
Recognitions:
|
Hold on! IN THE LAB FRAME, the B-field at any LOCATION
on the plane perpendicular to v_2 is reaching a maximum, so dB/dt (at the place Q1 is at the time) is zero. (Since we're not told actual distances nor velocities, I wont include the propagation delay explicitly ; the line of dB/dt = 0 is really along tan(theta) = v/c. The E-field and B-field disturbances propagate at c, so the 2 subscripts on each F are displaced by t=d/c.) Q1 is moving into a region of stronger B, but if you want to use dB/dt for this, you need to find new E and B, the calculation in Q1 REST FRAME. What Shahid didn't "get" was that you really NEED to include the dE/dt (displacement current) term, since this is not a static situation. At the location of Q1, this is zero, while at Q2 it's not. |
| Aug31-05, 11:40 PM | #13 |
|
|
Damn this is complicated. Maybe I'll check this thread out again after my E+M waves class (starting... tomorrow!
).
|
| Thread Closed |
Similar discussions for: lorentz force
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | Replies | ||
| Lorentz Force | Introductory Physics Homework | 3 | ||
| Lorentz Force Law | Introductory Physics Homework | 1 | ||
| Lorentz Force | Introductory Physics Homework | 2 | ||
| Force as a Function of Velocity (Lorentz Force) | Introductory Physics Homework | 4 | ||
| Lorentz Force | Introductory Physics Homework | 4 | ||