Accelerating charged particles and FOR

AI Thread Summary
An electron stationary on Earth does not emit electromagnetic (EM) radiation, but an observer in space, who sees the electron as accelerating due to Earth's motion, may perceive emitted photons. The discussion highlights that photon number is not conserved across different reference frames, allowing for discrepancies in observed photon emissions. The emission of light by accelerating charged particles is linked to changes in their electric field, which can create kinks that generate radiation. While the mechanics of this process are complex, resources like applets and the Larmor formula can provide further insights. Overall, the conversation explores the nuances of EM radiation emission in varying reference frames.
raymes_k
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
if, say, an electron is stationary on Earth (ignore the probability or possibility of this for now). it, of course, is not emitting any EM radiation. However, an observer in space (stationary with reference to the sun) is looking at the electron. relative to them, the electron is accelerating (circular motion around the earth). is any EM radiation emitted? where have i gone wrong here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
raymes_k said:
if, say, an electron is stationary on Earth (ignore the probability or possibility of this for now). it, of course, is not emitting any EM radiation. However, an observer in space (stationary with reference to the sun) is looking at the electron. relative to them, the electron is accelerating (circular motion around the earth). is any EM radiation emitted? where have i gone wrong here?

I don't think you've gone wrong at all. As I understand it, photon number is not conserved in arbitrary coordinate transformations, so it's normal to see a different number of photons in accelerated and non-accelerated coordinate systems, including cases where one sees zero number of photons and the other sees non-zero numbers of photons.
 
so basically it is possible for the external observer to see photons being emitted. but then there's the question of whether these photons can be used for any constructive purpose. is this violating conservation of energy principles?
 
Why do charged particles emit light when accelerated anyways??
 
ArmoSkater87 said:
Why do charged particles emit light when accelerated anyways??

There are various applets that show what the electric field lines of an accelerating charge looks like. For instance

http://webphysics.davidson.edu/Applets/Retard/Retard_FEL.html

It's fairly easy to see from these that the electric field lines of an accelerating charge get "kinked".

The example in the above URL where you suddenly stop a moving charge exhibits this "kinking" process especially well.

The argument that the kink represents the emission of radiation is harder to follow,IMO, though it is easy to see that such a kink represents a rapidly changing electric field and hence generates a magnetic field. It's probable I'm missing some simple explanation.

The detailed explanation is given by the Lamor formula for an accelerating charge, for instance

http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/~rfitzp/teaching/jk1/lectures/node31.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Awsome sites, thanks a lot. :)
 
This is from Griffiths' Electrodynamics, 3rd edition, page 352. I am trying to calculate the divergence of the Maxwell stress tensor. The tensor is given as ##T_{ij} =\epsilon_0 (E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} E^2)+\frac 1 {\mu_0}(B_iB_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} B^2)##. To make things easier, I just want to focus on the part with the electrical field, i.e. I want to find the divergence of ##E_{ij}=E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij}E^2##. In matrix form, this tensor should look like this...
Thread 'Applying the Gauss (1835) formula for force between 2 parallel DC currents'
Please can anyone either:- (1) point me to a derivation of the perpendicular force (Fy) between two very long parallel wires carrying steady currents utilising the formula of Gauss for the force F along the line r between 2 charges? Or alternatively (2) point out where I have gone wrong in my method? I am having problems with calculating the direction and magnitude of the force as expected from modern (Biot-Savart-Maxwell-Lorentz) formula. Here is my method and results so far:- This...
Back
Top