Charge Radiation: Acceleration & Constant Charges

  • Thread starter Thread starter Inquisiter
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Charge Radiation
AI Thread Summary
All accelerating charges emit radiation, but when acceleration is constant, the radiation reaction force is effectively zero due to the balance with inertial forces. Even if a charge is not accelerating, if the observer is in an accelerating frame, oscillating electromagnetic fields can still be detected, indicating radiation. When a charge experiences constant deceleration, energy is expended, suggesting that radiation may be directed toward the charge. The radiation field's intensity decreases with distance, following a 1/r relationship, meaning it can extend infinitely unless otherwise constrained. The Larmor formula quantifies the power radiated by a nonrelativistic charge under linear acceleration, applicable in various directional contexts.
Inquisiter
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
How is the fact that ALL accelerating charges radiate reconciled with the fact that the radiation reaction force is ZERO when the acceleration of the charge is CONSTANT??

Also, if you are accelerating, but the charge is NOT, do you see any radiation coming from the charge or not?


Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
the radiation force is not zero. Tthe part of the radiation force which is propotional to the acceleration is combined wth the inertia force.
If you are accelerating, then you will see oscillating electromagnetic field, so you should see a radiation.
 
shyboy said:
the radiation force is not zero. Tthe part of the radiation force which is propotional to the acceleration is combined wth the inertia force.
If you are accelerating, then you will see oscillating electromagnetic field, so you should see a radiation.
So does that mean that when the acceleration is constant the charge radiates but the radiation doesn't go off to infinity, but rather stays with the charge (in the charge's field)? What if in your frame of reference the charge is undergoing constant DEceleration? Now the charge is doing work on whatever is decelerating it, that energy has to come from somewhere, does that mean that the radiation(i.e. the Poynting vector) is directed TOWARD the charge? But if the acceleration is not constant, then I guess the radiation goes off to infinity and can't be recovered? Ok, this doesn't seem right... The radiation field is proportional to 1/r. But if the acceleration is constant, it's still proportional to 1/r, right? So the radiation DOES go off to infinity, otherwise I'd think that it would be proportional to 1/r^2.
 
Last edited:
OK, thre is so called Larmor formula for a linearly accelerated nonrelativistic charge

P=\frac{1}{4\pi \epsilon_0}\frac{2e^2\ddot x^2}{3c}

Larmor formula is applicable for acceleration in arbitrary direction to the velocity
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
It may be shown from the equations of electromagnetism, by James Clerk Maxwell in the 1860’s, that the speed of light in the vacuum of free space is related to electric permittivity (ϵ) and magnetic permeability (μ) by the equation: c=1/√( μ ϵ ) . This value is a constant for the vacuum of free space and is independent of the motion of the observer. It was this fact, in part, that led Albert Einstein to Special Relativity.

Similar threads

Back
Top