Gravitationally accelerated electron

  • Thread starter Thread starter ardenbook
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Electron
ardenbook
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
If I drill a hole through the center of a motionless asteroid,
and drop a charged object down it, If the hole goes all the way through,
the particle will oscillate, speeding up as it moves towards the center,
and slowing down as it moves away. If radiating, we'd expect the
oscillations to dampen as some gravitational potential energy gets
irreversibly converted. But according to "equivalence principle",
the charged object is in free-fall and should not feel any gravity,
then it should not radiate.
If not radiating, oscillations wouldn't dampen.
So which one is true, dampen or not dampen ??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ardenbook said:
If I drill a hole through the center of a motionless asteroid,
and drop a charged object down it, If the hole goes all the way through,
the particle will oscillate, speeding up as it moves towards the center,
and slowing down as it moves away. If radiating, we'd expect the
oscillations to dampen as some gravitational potential energy gets
irreversibly converted. But according to "equivalence principle",
the charged object is in free-fall and should not feel any gravity,
then it should not radiate.
If not radiating, oscillations wouldn't dampen.
So which one is true, dampen or not dampen ??

That is not "what" the equivalence principle says. Radiation is a far field effect. The field of the electron extends to a global scale. The experiment is intrinsically nonlocal. See section 2 of chapter 7 at
http://www.geocities.com/zcphysicsms/chap7.htm#BM7_2
 
DW said:
That is not "what" the equivalence principle says. Radiation is a far field effect. The field of the electron extends to a global scale. The experiment is intrinsically nonlocal. See section 2 of chapter 7 at
http://www.geocities.com/zcphysicsms/chap7.htm#BM7_2

Can you tell me if it dampen or not dampen ??
If it dampens, then the radiating energy comes from gravity and
shows that gravity is a force.
But in GR, we were taught that gravity is not a force and objects move in geodesic if no other force acts on it.
 
ardenbook said:
Can you tell me if it dampen or not dampen ??
If it dampens, then the radiating energy comes from gravity and
shows that gravity is a force.
But in GR, we were taught that gravity is not a force and objects move in geodesic if no other force acts on it.

I thought I did. Yes, it damps. No, gravity is not a real four-vector force. However the spacetime curvature is expressed by a tensor. That is what is real and has real gravitational effects on nonlocal experiments including this one. That level of equivalence is only a statement about local experiments and as such does not apply.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
Back
Top