I Centre of Mass-Energy: Griffiths Electrodynamics 4th Ed.

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter PeroK
  • Start date Start date
PeroK
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
2024 Award
Messages
29,177
Reaction score
20,835
This is actually from Griffiths Electrodynamics 4th edition, page 546.

He defines the centre of mass-energy of a system of particles as:
$$\vec{R} = \frac{1}{E} \sum E_i \vec{r_i}$$
And gives that the total momentum of the system is:
$$\vec{P} = \frac{E}{c^2} \frac{d \vec{R}}{dt}$$
In a footnote he says that the proof of this is non-trivial and refers to a couple of papers.
I took a look at this for two particles and got:
$$\frac{d \vec{R}}{dt} = \frac{1}{(E_1 + E_2)^2}[E_1^2 \vec{u_1} + E_2^2 \vec{u_2} + E_1E_2(\vec{u_1} + \vec {u_2}) + (E_1\frac{dE_2}{dt} - E_2\frac{dE_1}{dt})(\vec{r_2} - \vec{r_1})]$$
$$= \frac{1}{(E_1 + E_2)^2}[(E_1 + E_2)(E_1 \vec{u_1} + E_2 \vec{u_2}) + (E_1\frac{dE_2}{dt} - E_2\frac{dE_1}{dt})(\vec{r_2} - \vec{r_1})]$$
$$= \frac{c^2}{E} \vec{P} + \frac{1}{E^2}[(E_1\frac{dE_2}{dt} - E_2\frac{dE_1}{dt})(\vec{r_2} - \vec{r_1})]$$
The total momentum came out but I can't see how the cross terms in the position vectors disappear. I couldn't find any specific references to this online. Any ideas about what's wrong?
 
  • Like
Likes Dale
Physics news on Phys.org
I might be able to answer my own question. If the particles are accelerating owing to an EM field that they themselves create, then energy and momentum are stored in the fields. This relation is only true when you include the energy-momentum from the fields. Unlike the classical case, using centre of mass, where it's generally true regardless of how the particles are accelerated.

It's clear now. Especially after reading the next page.
 
Last edited:
However the ancient references are both wrong.
Example 12.13 and Eq. (12.72) are also wrong, as is the paper in Ref. 21.
The only correct statement is "this is not a very realistic model."
 
Of course, in the case of pure neutral particle dynamics, with energy differentials zero except for collisions, the result is trivially true ...
 
The equation does not hold if electromagnetic energy and momentum are included, or if there are external forces.
 
Meir Achuz said:
The equation does not hold if electromagnetic energy and momentum are included, or if there are external forces.
Consistent with what I said ...
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
Back
Top