I Calculating Force & Acceleration in Electrostatic Field (B=0)

MichPod
Messages
231
Reaction score
46
For a case of electrostatic field (B is equal zero), how should the force acting on a moving charge be calculated if we want to take into account all the relativistic effects? Also would it be correct to calculate the acceleration of the charge as a=F/m, or should some other formula be used? For simplicity, as a special case, let's consider the velocity of the charge to be orthogonal to the vector E of the electric field.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In an electromagnetic field the Lagrangian of the charge is ##L = -m \sqrt{1-v^2} + q \mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{v} - q \phi## therefore by Lagrange's equation $$\dfrac{d}{dt} \left( \dfrac{m\mathbf{v}}{\sqrt{1-v^2}} + q \mathbf{A} \right) = q\left[ (\mathbf{v} \cdot \nabla) \mathbf{A} + \mathbf{v} \times (\nabla \times \mathbf{A}) - \nabla \phi \right]$$Since the electric and magnetic field vectors are respectively defined ##\mathbf{E} = - \dfrac{\partial \mathbf{A}}{\partial t} - \nabla \phi## and ##\mathbf{B} = \nabla \times \mathbf{A}## this becomes ##\dfrac{d}{dt} \left(\dfrac{m\mathbf{v}}{\sqrt{1-v^2}} \right) = q( \mathbf{E} + \mathbf{v} \times \mathbf{B})##
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes MichPod, vanhees71 and Dale
MichPod said:
For a case of electrostatic field (B is equal zero), how should the force acting on a moving charge be calculated if we want to take into account all the relativistic effects? Also would it be correct to calculate the acceleration of the charge as a=F/m, or should some other formula be used? For simplicity, as a special case, let's consider the velocity of the charge to be orthogonal to the vector E of the electric field.

You might want to look at wiki, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_electromagnetism_and_special_relativity, or a textbook, if you have access and the appropriate background to read a textbook.

With B=0, you will see that F = qE, where E is the electric field.

You will also see the relativisitic transformation laws for the electric fields E and B, which do not transform as vectors. This only matters if you need to transform frames of reference. If you pick a frame of reference and stick with it, it may not be necessary to know how to correctly transform between frames.

The relationship between force and acceleration in SR is moderately complex, acceleration is not necessarily in the direction of the force (though in some special circumstances it can be).

One simple treatment that gives the correct results is the concept of longitudinal and transverse mass. See for instance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relativity#Transverse_and_longitudinal_mass. As wiki mentions, these concepts were used by Einstein early on, but later abandoned by him, and others. So they're not a modern treatment, but may be useful as an introduction to someone who doesn't want the full treatment.
 
A simple treatment can also be found in Sects. 2.1 and 2.2 of

https://itp.uni-frankfurt.de/~hees/pf-faq/srt.pdf

The upshot of the heuristics is that you can assume that Newtonian mechanics is (at least approximately) correct in the momentaneous rest frame of the particle. Then via Lorentz invariance you can extend the dynamics to the general case, which leads you to the conclusion that for massive particles you can just use the proper time of the particle instead of coordinate time, leading to the definition of the four-velocity and the four-momentum
$$p^{\mu}=m \mathrm{d}_{\tau} x^{\mu}.$$
since
$$(\mathrm{d}_{\tau} x^{\mu}) (\mathrm{d}_{\tau} x_{\mu})=c^2=\text{const}$$
the "on-shell condition"
$$p_{\mu} p^{\mu}=m^2 c^2$$
holds and thus the relativistic equation of motion
$$\mathrm{d}_{\tau} p^{\mu}=K^{\mu},$$
where ##K^{\mu}## is in general a function of ##x^{\mu}## and ##p^{\mu}##, implies the constraint
$$p_{\mu} \mathrm{d}_{\tau} p^{\mu}=0=p_{\mu} K^{\mu}.$$
That's why only three equations of motion are indpendent, and the fourth follows, and you can as well write the equation of motion for the spatial part of the above manifestly covariant version in terms of coordinate-time derivative, using ##\mathrm{d}_{\tau}=\gamma \mathrm{d}_t##. From this you get
$$\vec{p}=m \mathrm{d}_{\tau} \vec{x}=m \gamma \mathrm{d}_t \vec{x}.$$
and
$$\mathrm{d}_{\tau} \vec{p}=\gamma \mathrm{d}_t \vec{p}=\vec{K}$$
or
$$m \mathrm{d}_t (\gamma \mathrm{d}_t \vec{x})=\frac{1}{\gamma} \vec{K}=\vec{F}.$$
Now of course all the beauty of the covariant formulation is gone, but it's in a similar form as in Newtonian physics and still fully relativistic.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes SiennaTheGr8
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