Is Electromagnetism's Causality Consistent with Special Relativity?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the consistency of electromagnetism's causality with special relativity, contrasting it with Newtonian gravity. It establishes that while Newton's gravitational force implies instantaneous action-at-a-distance, Maxwell's equations, including Gauss' law for the electric field, are Lorentz invariant and do not violate causality. The key takeaway is that the completeness of Maxwell's equations, as opposed to the singular nature of Newton's law, ensures that classical electromagnetism aligns with the principles of special relativity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Maxwell's equations and their implications in electromagnetism
  • Familiarity with special relativity and Lorentz invariance
  • Knowledge of Newtonian gravity and its mathematical formulation
  • Basic concepts of action-at-a-distance in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the complete set of Maxwell's equations and their Lorentz invariance
  • Explore the implications of Gauss' law for electric fields in electromagnetism
  • Investigate the differences between classical and relativistic physics in terms of causality
  • Review introductory physics courses to identify gaps in the treatment of electromagnetism and gravity
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, educators in electromagnetism, and researchers interested in the foundations of relativity and its implications for classical forces.

VantagePoint72
Messages
820
Reaction score
34
We are usually told in an introduction to general relativity that when special relativity was completed, there was a contradiction with Newtonian physics. The Newtonian gravitational force of M on m is [itex]F_g = -G \frac{M m}{r^2} \hat{r}[/itex] where [itex]\vec{r}[/itex] is the spatial vector from M to m. This equation for the gravitational force on a point mass, plus the principle of superposition, are equivalent to Gauss' law for the gravitational field: [itex]\nabla \cdot \vec{g} = -4\pi G \rho_{mass}[/itex].
We conclude from this that the Newtonian gravitational force is instantaneous since any change in [itex]\vec{r}[/itex] immediately translates into a change in the force. Such an instantaneous action-at-a-distance violates special relativity, which tells us that c is the maximum speed of influence. Otherwise, causality is violated.

Now, in the case of electromagnetism, we know that Maxwell's equations are Lorentz invariant. This is true even when they're written in the form usually first encountered in an undergraduate course (i.e. http://www.physics.udel.edu/~watson/phys208/ending2.html), which is to say, not the covariant form in which Lorentz symmetry is obvious. Hence—a point usually emphasized at the end of such a course—classical electromagnetism is fully consistent with special relativity. However, the first of Maxwell's equations is just Gauss' law for the electric field: [itex]\nabla \cdot \vec{E} = \rho_{charge}/\epsilon_0[/itex]. This has precisely the same form as Newton's law of gravity in differential form does. So why does this equation imply action-at-a-distance in the case of the Newtonian field but not in the case of the electric field?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
in an introduction to general relativity ... first encountered in an undergraduate course ...
So... could it be that undergraduate/introduction courses in physics are incomplete?

So why does this equation imply action-at-a-distance in the case of the Newtonian field but not in the case of the electric field?
It doesn't - you need the other three equations as well where, for Newtonian Gravity, you only have the one. Are Maxwell's equations individually Lorentz invarient?
 
Simon Bridge said:
So... could it be that undergraduate/introduction courses in physics are incomplete?

My point is that even in that form they are Lorentz invariant.

Simon Bridge said:
It doesn't - you need the other three equations as well where, for Newtonian Gravity, you only have the one. Are Maxwell's equations individually Lorentz invarient?

Ah, of course. Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K