I Are Electric and Gravitational Fields Different for Moving Objects?

Silviu
Messages
612
Reaction score
11
Hello! I was wondering if the electric and gravitational fields are the same for a moving and a stationary object. The electric field (assume it is created by a stationary charge) is ##E = \frac{q}{\epsilon_0 4 \pi r^2}##, for a stationary observer, but it is higher for a moving one, as the r is getting smaller, while all the other are constant. Is this correct? For gravitational field, the formula would be ##G\frac{M}{r^2}##. The same reasoning can be applied here, only that in this case the mass M seems to increase. Are my reasoning correct? And if so, why does the electric and gravitational field behave differently, beside the math involved? Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The electric field is not the same for a moving and for a stationary charge. Not only does the electric field change, it also mixes with the magnetic field under Lorentz transformations.

There is no gravitation in SR.
 
Orodruin said:
The electric field is not the same for a moving and for a stationary charge. Not only does the electric field change, it also mixes with the magnetic field under Lorentz transformations.

There is no gravitation in SR.
What do you mean by there is no gravitation in SR. You can still treat problems in SR when forces are involved. The nature of the force shouldn't matter, so it can be created by gravity, right?
 
Silviu said:
You can still treat problems in SR when forces are involved.
Gravitation is not a force in relativity. Forces in relativity need to be local as action at a distance would violate causality. You cannot go about just assuming that nothing will change with the gravitational field and it is best to keep away from all considerations of gravity in SR.'

On the other hand, classical electromagnetism (in the form of Maxwell's equations) is fully relativistically covariant. It is in fact one of the cornerstones in how relativity was conceived.
 
SR considers inertial systems. No force, no acceleration. Constant straight velocity.
 
Thuring said:
SR considers inertial systems. No force, no acceleration. Constant straight velocity.
This is not correct, but a common misconception among laymen. It is perfectly possible to work with accelerated frames and forces in SR.
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
According to the General Theory of Relativity, time does not pass on a black hole, which means that processes they don't work either. As the object becomes heavier, the speed of matter falling on it for an observer on Earth will first increase, and then slow down, due to the effect of time dilation. And then it will stop altogether. As a result, we will not get a black hole, since the critical mass will not be reached. Although the object will continue to attract matter, it will not be a...
Back
Top