Falling electric dipole contradicts the equivalence principle?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the behavior of an electric dipole consisting of charges ##q## and ##-q##, both of mass ##m##, under gravitational and electric forces. When the dipole is accelerated perpendicular to its moment, it experiences an electric force given by $$F_e=\frac{e^2a}{c^2d}$$. The dipole accelerates faster than gravity, leading to the conclusion that this behavior does not contradict the equivalence principle, as the principle holds true only locally. The dipole's intrinsic acceleration and its electromagnetic interactions are crucial to understanding its motion in different frames of reference.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electric dipoles and their properties
  • Familiarity with Newton's second law of motion
  • Knowledge of electromagnetic theory, specifically electric forces
  • Basic concepts of general relativity and the equivalence principle
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the equivalence principle in general relativity
  • Explore the behavior of electric dipoles in varying gravitational fields
  • Investigate the mathematical derivation of forces acting on dipoles
  • Learn about electromagnetic interactions and their effects on mass
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, electrical engineers, and students studying electromagnetism and general relativity, particularly those interested in the nuances of force interactions in electric dipoles.

jcap
Messages
166
Reaction score
12
Consider an electric dipole consisting of charges ##q## and ##-q##, both of mass ##m##, separated by a distance ##d##.

If the dipole is given an acceleration ##a## perpendicular to its moment the total electric force on it, due to each charge acting on the other, is given approximately by
$$F_e=\frac{e^2a}{c^2d}$$
where we introduce ##e^2 \equiv q^2/4\pi\epsilon_0## for clarity. The exact expression is given in Electrostatic Levitation of a Dipole Eq(5) (http://inspirehep.net/record/206900/files/slac-pub-3529.pdf).

Now suppose the dipole, initially oriented horizontally, is dropped in a vertical gravitational field of strength ##g##.

Applying Newton's second law to the dipole as a whole we have: gravitational force (gravitational mass times field strength) plus electric force must equal the inertial mass times acceleration
$$2mg+F_e=2m a$$
Therefore the acceleration ##a## of the dipole is given by
$$a=g\large(1-\frac{e^2}{2mc^2d}\large)^{-1}$$
Thus the dipole is accelerating faster than gravity. An observer falling with the dipole will see it move away from him whereas in deep space the observer would not see the dipole move away.

Surely this contradicts the equivalence principle?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Actually, if you read the reference, there is no need for global effects, The reference itself uses the POE to predict a gravitation effect, which they then explain.

1) The dipole spontaneously accelerates far away from gravity, in an inertial frame.
2) In a rocket whose acceleration matches the the dipole’s, the dipole will appear to float.

is equivalent to the following on a planet of the right mass and size, over a small region, for a short time (the locality of the POE):

1) The dipole spontaneously accelerates in a free fall frame.
2) The dipole floats in a stationary frame.

The key is that the dipole under discussion is not just neutral matter, it is analogous to a small rocket, with an intrinsic acceleration.

The reference also goes on to state why this theroretical effect can never be achieved in practice.
 
-\frac{e^2}{dc^2} in your Fe forluma is electromagnetic interaction energy/c^2. So mass of the system M is
M=2m - \frac{e^2}{dc^2} < 2m of separate charges. If not dipole but pair of charges of same signature, M=2m + \frac{e^2}{dc^2} > 2m.

May I regard your case same as if a single particle of mass M falls in the gravitational field?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
8K