Gravitational field has energy, E field does not?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of energy associated with gravitational and electric fields, specifically questioning a statement made in a physics lecture regarding the nature of these fields and their relation to energy. The scope includes conceptual clarification and exploration of potential energy in both fields.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the assertion that a gravitational field has energy while an electric field does not, suggesting both fields have potential energy.
  • Another participant expresses confusion about the original statement and seeks clarification on its meaning.
  • A later reply attempts to clarify that the discussion may relate to the equivalence of mass and energy in relativity, noting that there is no similar equivalence for electric charge.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the initial statement about energy in gravitational and electric fields, with no consensus reached on the interpretation of the lecture content.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential misunderstandings of the relationship between charge and energy, as well as the implications of relativity on these concepts. Specific definitions and assumptions regarding energy in fields remain unresolved.

csmcmillion
Messages
63
Reaction score
2
Watched a physics lecture yesterday in which the teacher stated that a G field has energy, but an E filed (due to the Coulomb force does not). This does not compute. Both fields have potential energy, yes?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, that doesn't make sense. Are you sure that's what they meant?
 
Pengwuino said:
Yes, that doesn't make sense. Are you sure that's what they meant?

Maybe not. The exact statement was "In an ordinary sense, electric charge is not energy, but gravitational charge is energy". So maybe I am misunderstanding the statement.
 
Okay that clears it up. They are talking about the equivalence between mass and energy that comes out of relativity. There is no analogous equivalence for charge.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Confused about work done on charge
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Undergrad Work done by electric field of an irregularly shaped conductor
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Undergrad Charge movement relative to magnetic field frame dependence/invariance
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Undergrad Is this analogy between Magnetic Force and Gravitational Force accurate in helping to understand what contributes more to a stronger magnetic force?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Undergrad Is the Poynting Vector Field the Only Factor in Energy Flow in Circuits?
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
High School Some Questions about Electric Current/Capacitors to help my understanding
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Undergrad Energy Flow From Battery to the Light Bulb
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
Undergrad Understanding dissipation of energy in a resistor through the Drude model
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad Do electromagnetic fields have momentum?
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Undergrad Does Poynting's Theorem only involve external fields?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K