A radially pulsating charged sphere creates which of these effects?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

A radially pulsating charged sphere emits electromagnetic radiation (statement a) but does not create a static magnetic field (statement b). The discussion centers on the assertion that the electric charge of the sphere generates an electric field capable of moving a nearby electrified particle (statement c), which is debated. The consensus is that while statement a is correct, statement b is incorrect, and statement c requires further mathematical proof to validate its correctness.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electromagnetic radiation principles
  • Knowledge of electric fields and their effects on charged particles
  • Familiarity with static and dynamic magnetic fields
  • Basic grasp of antenna operation and electromagnetic wave propagation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of electromagnetic radiation and monopole radiation
  • Learn about electric field interactions with charged particles
  • Investigate the mathematical formulation of electric and magnetic fields
  • Explore the operation of antennas and their role in generating electromagnetic fields
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, electrical engineers, and anyone interested in the dynamics of electromagnetic fields and their interactions with charged particles.

LCSphysicist
Messages
644
Reaction score
162
Homework Statement
A radially pulsating charged sphere
(a) emits electromagnetic radiation
(b) creates a static magnetic field
(c) can set a nearby electrified particle into motion.
Relevant Equations
.
I know that (a) is right, and (b) is wrong. The problem is with (c)... It seems correct to me! I can't see how this is not true. The electric charge o the sphere by itself will create an electric field, which will move the particle.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
LCSphysicist said:
Homework Statement:: A radially pulsating charged sphere
(a) emits electromagnetic radiation
(b) creates a static magnetic field
(c) can set a nearby electrified particle into motion.
Relevant Equations:: .

I know that (a) is right, and (b) is wrong. The problem is with (c)... It seems correct to me! I can't see how this is not true. The electric charge o the sphere by itself will create an electric field, which will move the particle.
What are your arguments?
 
Orodruin said:
What are your arguments?
"The electric charge of the sphere by itself will create an electric field, which will move the particle." is my argument.
 
LCSphysicist said:
"The electric charge of the sphere by itself will create an electric field, which will move the particle." is my argument.
I meant for all of the problems.
 
Orodruin said:
I meant for all of the problems.
(a) is correct. It emit radiation, obviously: Since the electric field configuration outside the sphere need to be oscillating, the information arriving at this point comes from the radiation that the oscillation of the sphere produces.
Now, i know there is a physical meaning for radiation, which is the term that didn't goes to zero at r infinity. If this is what the question is asking, that is, if this term is present on the potential, i can't say.

(b) This makes no sense, to create a static configuration of magnetic field, i think, we should have a constant current, or a uniform variating electric field ($\partial E / \partial t = c_{1} \neq 0$), not the case here.

(c) Should be right also. Unless, i can see in my head but not put on math, they are talking about the avarage motion of a particle. What i mean is that, the only system i can see that makes sense to say that the particle does not move, is the one in which the electric field attract the particle, the magnetic field generated by it curves it path so that it returns at the same position after a period, and so tecnically it didn't move. That i can't prove.
 
LCSphysicist said:
(a) is correct. It emit radiation, obviously: Since the electric field configuration outside the sphere need to be oscillating, the information arriving at this point comes from the radiation that the oscillation of the sphere produces.
Now, i know there is a physical meaning for radiation, which is the term that didn't goes to zero at r infinity. If this is what the question is asking, that is, if this term is present on the potential, i can't say.
Here is a hint: there is no electromagnetic monopole radiation.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
Orodruin said:
Here is a hint: there is no electromagnetic monopole radiation.
I can think about it late, but thank you. By now, i would like to understand how can "c" be wrong.
 
Why do you think it wrong ?
 
hutchphd said:
Why do you think it wrong ?
OOp, right in time XD.
Because the answer provided is only a.
 
  • #10
Where is this from?
 
  • #11
LCSphysicist said:
OOp, right in time XD.
Because the answer provided is only a.
Orodruin said:
Here is a hint: there is no electromagnetic monopole radiation.
I don't know it it will help you @LCSphysicist , but think about how an antenna works. You drive a voltage differentially between the two antenna elements to create a differential voltage and current, and that's what creates the EM field that propagates away from the antenna. If you drive the two antenna elements with the same common-mode current, there is no differential current, so no launching of the EM waveform.
 
  • #12
LCSphysicist said:
Since the electric field configuration outside the sphere need to be oscillating
What is the field outside a uniformly charged spherical shell of radius r?
 
  • #13
LCSphysicist said:
OOp, right in time XD.
Because the answer provided is only a.
Well, that is wrong, so …
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
23
Views
4K
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K