Length contraction in a current carrying wire?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of length contraction in a current-carrying wire and its implications for electric neutrality. Participants debate whether a stationary observer would perceive an electric field due to differences in charge density between moving electrons and stationary protons. It is established that the wire is electrically neutral in its rest frame, and this neutrality must hold true across different reference frames, despite relativistic effects. The conversation highlights the complexity of understanding how electric and magnetic fields interact in moving frames, emphasizing that the observed effects are marginal at low velocities. Ultimately, the discussion seeks clarity on the relationship between charge density, electric fields, and relativistic effects in current-carrying wires.
  • #61
Which is roughly the same answer I’ve given in post #44 .

So what’s the difference between us? I want to know why the –ve charge density doesn’t increase in a non moving lab frame, not even for the most massive currents. You are apparently happy to accept the facts and to get on with life. (perhaps not a bad idea).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
I still don't understand your confusion on this point. Again, there is no lattice for the electrons so they are free to take any spacing that satisfies the laws and the boundary conditions.

You seem to understand that everything in the lab frame follows Maxwell's equations, and you seem to understand that when you Lorentz transform into the "drift" frame you get correct results in that frame also. Do you possibly think that Maxwell's equations should be violated in the lab frame for large currents?

I don't think it is a matter of me being happy to accept the facts. The facts are empirical data and there is never any question of accepting them or not; you must accept them or you are not doing science. In my mind the point is that the theories fit the facts and that is what makes me happy to accept the theories and get on with life.
 
  • #63
DaleSpam said:
there is no lattice for the electrons so they are free to take any spacing that satisfies the laws and the boundary conditions.

You seem to understand that everything in the lab frame follows Maxwell's equations, and you seem to understand that when you Lorentz transform into the "drift" frame you get correct results in that frame also.
That almost sounds that you could go along with the statement that in a drift frame conduction electrons are spread out.
 
  • #64
Certainly. The distance between conduction electrons in the drift frame is larger than the distance between electrons in the lab frame. In fact, the distance between electrons in the drift frame is larger than the distance between electrons in any other frame since the proper distance is always greater than or equal to the coordinate distance.
 
  • #65
Just some thoughts.

In their rest frame the conduction electrons must all move apart a little and therefore end up forming a longer length than the lattice. In the lab frame this expansion is not observed but it must be there in the drift frame to start with. These electrons see the lattice contracted but they still feel a force somehow which moves them apart. How do the electrons know how far to move? What force drives them apart?
 
  • #66
Per Oni said:
How do the electrons know how far to move? What force drives them apart?
The EM-field (Maxwell's equations, especially Gauss' law). Just like in the lab frame.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
5K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
6K
  • · Replies 64 ·
3
Replies
64
Views
6K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 166 ·
6
Replies
166
Views
14K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K