Electric field lines from a moving charged particle

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the behavior of electric fields from a moving charged particle, specifically a proton, and its interaction with a stationary electron. It explores a thought experiment where a proton appears in a vacuum and questions whether the electron would move towards the proton's initial position or its future position after one second. The conversation highlights that the scenario violates charge conservation laws, making it difficult to predict outcomes based on existing physical laws. The participants agree that while the thought experiment illustrates concepts of electric field propagation, it is fundamentally flawed due to its violation of electrodynamics. The discussion concludes with an acknowledgment of the complexities introduced by relativistic effects and magnetic fields.
nomadreid
Gold Member
Messages
1,748
Reaction score
243
The electric field emanating from charged particle travels at the speed of light; fine. To pose an unrealistic thought experiment (a more realistic, if more complicated, thought experiment could replace this one, but the unrealistic one gives the idea), if a proton were to suddenly pop into existence at a certain time T in a vacuum, and a stationary electron were situated 300,000 km away (and nothing else in the vicinity), then after one second, at time T+1 (ignoring the difficulty in synchronizing watches ), the electron would start to move towards the proton (and vice-versa, of course) in a straight line between the electron and proton. So far, so classic. However, if that proton is moving, would the electron at the moment T+1
(a) start to move toward the position the proton was at time T, or
(b) with a sort of quantum-eraser retroactive effect move toward the position the proton would be at time T+1?
(ignoring the effect of any magnetic field created by the moving proton)
Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The appearing proton violates the laws of electrodynamics (charge conservation). It does not make sense to ask what physical laws predict in a situation where the laws are violated.

"Where the proton was one second ago" is a better description, but it is not always exact.
 
  • Like
Likes nomadreid
Thanks for the reply, mfb.
mfb said:
The appearing proton violates the laws of electrodynamics (charge conservation). It does not make sense to ask what physical laws predict in a situation where the laws are violated.
This is why I inserted the caveat that one could certainly make up a Gedankenexperiment which did not violate the laws of physics but which got the idea across. My experiment was in the spirit of 3:40-5:20 of Greene's . I could have perhaps better simply asked the question without thought experiment in this way: "assuming it makes sense to talk about the velocity and straight-line path of the carriers of the electric field, then it makes sense to ask about that path as a straight line between two space-time points. Are these points separated in time as would be expected in a classical theory, or not?"
mfb said:
"Where the proton was one second ago" is a better description, but it is not always exact.
I presume that is the answer to my question, despite its impossibility. I also presume that the lack of exactitude you refer to is due to relativistic considerations, not to mention the magnetic field. Any further corrections will be appreciated.
Thanks again.
 
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...
Back
Top