Accelerating charges and frames of reference

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the behavior of accelerating charges, particularly in different frames of reference, and the implications for electromagnetic radiation and gravitational effects. It explores theoretical concepts related to electromagnetism and gravity, including the conditions under which charges emit radiation and the role of acceleration.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that an accelerating charge radiates light, but in its own frame of reference, it is stationary and does not emit light, raising questions about how this is explained.
  • One participant notes that acceleration is invariant and felt by the object undergoing it, suggesting that a charge in free fall should not radiate, although this has not been experimentally verified.
  • Another participant introduces the idea that if gravitationally accelerated mass radiates gravitational waves, then gravitationally accelerated charges should emit electromagnetic waves.
  • Some participants discuss the relationship between acceleration and radiation detection, emphasizing that detection is relative to the observer's frame of reference.
  • Questions are raised about whether a charge experiences back-reaction from emitted radiation when both the charge and observer are under acceleration.
  • References to academic papers are provided to support claims about the relative nature of electromagnetic radiation detection.
  • There is a suggestion that the complexity of the problem increases when gravity is introduced alongside electromagnetism.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the implications of acceleration on radiation emission and detection, with no consensus reached on the explanations or interpretations of the phenomena discussed.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes unresolved questions about the experimental verification of claims regarding radiation from gravitationally accelerated charges and the mathematical frameworks involved in understanding these concepts.

lavinia
Science Advisor
Messages
3,385
Reaction score
760
An accelerating charge radiates light. But in its own frame of reference it is stationary. So it does not emit light.
How is this explained?

Extreme Example:

A charge inside an elevator is falling in a gravitational field. The elevator is lined with a light sensitive sensor that triggers a chemical explosion that obliterates the elevator in mid-air.

Inside the elevator a man is reading a book. The charge is stationary in his free fall frame. The man finishes the book just as the elevator hits the ground.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Acceleration is invariant, meaning that it is actually felt by the object ubdergoing acceleration and all observers will agree that the object is actually accelerating. The acceleration due to gravity is not an actual acceleration in the sense that an accelerometer would not know whether it is floating in space or in free fall under the influence of gravity. So a charge falling in a gravitational field shouldn't radiate, but this has not been experimentally verified as far as i know.
 
lavinia said:
An accelerating charge radiates light. But in its own frame of reference it is stationary. So it does not emit light.
How is this explained?
That question is related to Hawking-Unruh radiation phenomenon.
See here:http://www.hep.princeton.edu/~mcdonald/accel/unruhrad.pdf
 
mrspeedybob said:
If gravitationally accelerated mass radiates gravity waves then gravitationally accelerated charge should emit EM waves.

Got a reference or an explanation for this?
 
Accelerated charge (with respect to stationary observers) emits EM radiation regardless of the cause of acceleration. But detection of EM radiation is relative, not absolute. It depends on the motion of receiver/antenna and EM field. Antenna of the observer in uniformly accelerated frame of the charge should not detect radiation from co-moving accelerated charge.
 
zoki85 said:
Accelerated charge (with respect to stationary observers) emits EM radiation regardless of the cause of acceleration. But detection of EM radiation is relative, not absolute. It depends on the motion of receiver/antenna and EM field. Antenna of the observer in uniformly accelerated frame of the charge should not detect radiation from co-moving accelerated charge.

If a charge and an observer are both under acceleration, shouldn't the charge experience back-reaction from the emitted radiation? And why wouldn't the observer pick up this radiation?
 
Drakkith said:
If a charge and an observer are both under acceleration, shouldn't the charge experience back-reaction from the emitted radiation? And why wouldn't the observer pick up this radiation?
I said why: Becouse detection of EM radiation is relative. I'm positive that can be rigorously shown by appropriate transformation of coordinates between the two systems in framework of GR (and probably is standard result).
 
zoki85 said:
I said why: Becouse detection of EM radiation is relative.

Can you elaborate on that?
 
  • #10
Most preceise elaboration is derivation. Luckily, I've just found a nicely written paper which backs up the statement:
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9903052
Even without going through all the steps of derivations, I can say I have at least two reasons why I can thrust it.
 
  • #11
Interesting read. Thanks, zoki.
 
  • #12
It seems to be the general consensus that the OP's issue is that the problem wasn't complicated enough. Instead of a straightforward question on electromagnetism, we have to throw in gravity. Then gravitational radiation. Then semiquantum gravity.
 
  • #13
Vanadium 50 said:
It seems to be the general consensus that the OP's issue is that the problem wasn't complicated enough. Instead of a straightforward question on electromagnetism, we have to throw in gravity. Then gravitational radiation. Then semiquantum gravity.

Welcome to PF! :wink:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 66 ·
3
Replies
66
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K