Does superposition hold for relativistic particles?

In summary, the superposition of electric and magnetic fields due to point charges is trivial to calculate, but if one of the charges is moving at relativistic speeds, the electric field is compressed and the superposition does not hold.
  • #1
granpa
2,268
7
the net electric field due to a collection of point charges is trivial to calculate because it is simply the superposition of the fields of the individual charges. but what if one of the charges is moving at relativistic speed and so its electric field is compressed. does superposition hold for relativistic particles?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Yes. Before special relativity, everything worked if we assumed that we were in absolute space and that Maxwell's equations were true, superposition and all. After relativity, the only difference is that every inertial frame became as good as absolute space, ie. Maxwell's equations were already relativistic, before the discovery of relativity.
 
  • #3
well I can see that for a collection of particles all moving at nearly the same speed but I'm having trouble figuring out how that's possible when they arent.
 
  • #4
2 particles moving at slightly different relativistic speeds pass one another. each particles field is compressed. how much is the field half way between them compressed?
 
  • #5
granpa said:
well I can see that for a collection of particles all moving at nearly the same speed but I'm having trouble figuring out how that's possible when they arent.

Oh, I see. Coulomb's law is not consistent with special relativity. The correct generalization is Gauss's law, which is generally written as the first Maxwell equation, and which you will find written in integral or differential form. Most generally, Gauss's law alone is also not relativistic, and we need all 4 Maxwell equations and the Lorentz force law.
 
  • #6
granpa said:
2 particles moving at slightly different relativistic speeds pass one another. each particles field is compressed. how much is the field half way between them compressed?

If the two particles are moving at constant speeds, you can calculate in a frame in which one is at rest to simplify things. Then use the Lorentz transform to switch to whatever frame you need after you have obtained the answer.

Edit: I should add that it matters greatly whether the charges are moving at constant speed or are accelerating. Superposition holds from very general considerations, but it's not intuitively obvious in many particular situations, so it's good (for you:smile:, I'm too lazy:redface:) to work these out to build physical intuition. This guy has some pretty cool stuff:http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~phys1/java/phys1/MovingCharge/MovingCharge.html.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
granpa said:
2 particles moving at slightly different relativistic speeds pass one another. each particles field is compressed. how much is the field half way between them compressed?
"field is compressed" is an awkward way of describing it. The electric and magnetic fields of each charge moving at constant velocity can be written down explicitly, but they have a complicated dependence on velocity and direction. Superposition holds for the addition of these fields. If the particles are accelerating, the retarded time must be used and the problem is usually intractable.
 
  • #8
well the reason superposition seems problematic for relativistic particles is this:

imagine that the compressed field from a particle extends beyond another charged particle at rest. how does the field on the other side of the stationary particle know to compress itself if all any given part of the field can see is the field immediately surrounding it? how does it know which particle it belongs to?

it occurs to me that rate of change of the field will be the same regardless of any intervening particles. maybe there is a force proportional to rate of change that compresses the field??
 

1. What is superposition in the context of relativistic particles?

In physics, superposition refers to the ability of waves or particles to exist in multiple states or positions at the same time. In the context of relativistic particles, it means that a particle can be in multiple places or states simultaneously.

2. How does the principle of superposition apply to relativistic particles?

The principle of superposition states that the combined effect of multiple waves or particles is the sum of their individual effects. This applies to relativistic particles in that their wave functions can combine and interfere with each other, resulting in different probabilities for the particle's location or state.

3. Does superposition hold for all relativistic particles?

Yes, the principle of superposition holds for all relativistic particles, including photons, electrons, and other subatomic particles. It is a fundamental concept in quantum mechanics, which describes the behavior of particles at the subatomic level.

4. What are some real-world examples of superposition in relativistic particles?

One example is the double-slit experiment, where a single particle can exhibit wave-like behavior by passing through both slits at the same time. Another example is quantum tunneling, where a particle can appear on the other side of a potential barrier without actually passing through it.

5. How does superposition affect our understanding of the behavior of relativistic particles?

Superposition challenges our classical, deterministic understanding of the universe and introduces probabilistic elements into the behavior of particles. It also plays a crucial role in technologies such as quantum computing, which take advantage of the ability of particles to be in multiple states at once.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
24
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
989
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
17
Views
677
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
102
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
911
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
894
Back
Top