- #1

- 34

- 0

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter roboticmehdi
- Start date

- #1

- 34

- 0

- #2

Mentor

- 34,062

- 11,834

Can you provide a reference for this? It is hard to say one way or the other without knowing the details.why do they say that electromagnetic field falls like 1/r ?

- #3

- 34

- 0

Can you provide a reference for this? It is hard to say one way or the other without knowing the details.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larmor_formula there in the part ''Derivation 2: Using Edward M. Purcell approach'' it says stuff related to this.

- #4

Mentor

- 34,062

- 11,834

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liénard–Wiechert_potential

If you look at the formula for the LW fields you see that for a stationary charge you get a 0 B field and a 1/r² E field, corresponding with Coulomb's law. If you look at the formula for the LW fields for a moving but not accelerating charge you get a 1/r² B field, corresponding with the Biot-Savart law. However, if you look at the formula for an accelerating charge you also get a 1/r E and a 1/r B field.

- #5

Gold Member

- 1,220

- 78

Share:

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 406

- Replies
- 7

- Views
- 690

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 498

- Replies
- 198

- Views
- 6K

- Replies
- 41

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 486

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 526

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 518

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 408

- Replies
- 11

- Views
- 542