Does J go to inf when v goes to c?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GiftOfPlasma
  • Start date Start date
GiftOfPlasma
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
In SR, does the current become infinite when the velocity of the charge approaches c?

I'm thinking it doesn't because of the SR Lagrangian for a charged particle:
L = -\frac{m c^{2}}{\gamma} - q \phi + q \vec{v} \cdot \vec{A}
doesn't have a gamma in the qv term.

Another way of putting this is: Does the four current equal the charge times the four velocity?

Thanks for your responses.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi GiftOfPlasma! :wink:
GiftOfPlasma said:
Another way of putting this is: Does the four current equal the charge times the four velocity?

Yes. :smile:
 
So the Lagrangian should be:
L = -\frac{m c^{2}}{\gamma} - q \phi + q {\gamma} \vec{v} \cdot \vec{A}

Thanks,
 
GiftOfPlasma said:
So the Lagrangian should be:
L = -\frac{m c^{2}}{\gamma} - q \phi + q {\gamma} \vec{v} \cdot \vec{A}
No, it shouldn't. The original one is ok, but you've probably lost c somewhere. I do not know what you mean by 4-current... 4-current density? If so recall that the volume is also contracted is SR.
 
Ok, I think I see what is going on, the original Lagrangian is for a charged particle.
The classical particle is always a point, so it doesn't contract.
Furthermore, the number of particles in a volume is the same in all reference frames.
The volume is contracted with respect to an observer moving relative to the volume.
So the relativistic observer sees a higher charge density and current density than a non-relativistic observer.

I found a good explanation here:
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/jk1/lectures/node16.html"

Thanks for the effort.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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...
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...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
Back
Top