Magnetic Fields of a Relativistic Charged Particle

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the magnetic field lines produced by a charged particle moving at relativistic speeds, particularly near the speed of light. Participants explore the mathematical formulations for the strength and direction of the magnetic field, the transition of field lines from non-relativistic to relativistic speeds, and the visual representation of these fields.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about visual representations of magnetic field lines for a charged particle moving close to the speed of light and asks if there are formulas for the magnetic field strength and direction as velocity approaches the speed of light.
  • Another participant emphasizes a desire to focus on the field lines created by relativistic particles, explicitly excluding discussions of synchrotron radiation.
  • A participant references a specific equation from a lecture on electromagnetic theory, suggesting it provides insight into the magnetic field of a moving charge under constant velocity.
  • It is proposed that the magnetic field can be derived by applying Lorentz transformations to the static Coulomb field of a charge at rest, leading to a mixed electric and magnetic field representation.
  • Another participant mentions that for non-uniform motion, the Liénard-Wiechert fields should be used to describe the fields of a point particle moving arbitrarily.
  • One participant shares their own visualizations of the magnetic field lines and describes how the field lines transition from circular patterns at low speeds to more complex shapes at relativistic speeds, providing specific values of velocity and corresponding Lorentz factors.
  • There is a reiteration of the challenge in finding resources that focus on fields generated by moving charges rather than those influenced by external fields.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the best methods to calculate and visualize the magnetic fields of relativistic charged particles. There is no consensus on a single approach or formula, and multiple perspectives on the topic remain present.

Contextual Notes

Some limitations include the dependence on specific assumptions regarding the motion of the charged particle, the complexity of the transformations involved, and the lack of consensus on the best visual representation of the magnetic fields.

Albertgauss
Gold Member
Messages
298
Reaction score
38
Where can I find a picture of the magnetic field lines produced by a charged particle moving near the speed of light?

Is there a formula for the strength of B and direction of field lines as v --> c? Does this equation reduce to Ampere's right hand rule for a moving charge's ability to create classical circular magnetic field lines when the particle's velocity is non-relativistic? Is there an animation somewhere that shows the transition from circular, Ampere field lines at everyday velocities to relativistic field lines as the charged particle gets faster?

I know that the electric field lines go from spherically symmetric to being bunched up like "Broomstick Hairs." I know that in relativity, E can be B in another frame and vice versa, but I'm not looking for transformations. I'm just watching the high energy particle go by and looking at its field lines.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Also, I don't want to know about synchotron radiation or anything where the charged particle produces radiation. Those are cases for charged particle feeling an external field. I want to know about field lines created by relativistic particles.
 
You will find the magnetic field of a moving charge by applying the Lorentz-transformation to the static Coulomb field of a charge at rest. The transformation mixes electric and magnetic fields. So instead of solving the equations for a moving charge one can start with the charge at rest, and then apply the transformation. That means we can equally well say that the charge is still at rest, we as observers are moving with some velocity relative to the rest frame of the charge, and we therefore see electric plus magnetic fields.

Setting c=1 and using that the B-field vanishes in the rest frame we find

B^\prime = - \gamma\;v \times E

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_electromagnetism_and_special_relativity
 
Albertgauss said:
I know that in relativity, E can be B in another frame and vice versa, but I'm not looking for transformations. I'm just watching the high energy particle go by and looking at its field lines.
Sure, but as the previous posters pointed out, the easiest way to calculate the field lines of a particle in uniform motion is by using the transforms.

If you have a particle that is not moving uniformly then the correct equations are given by the Lienard Wiechert fields:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liénard–Wiechert_potential
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node129.html

This is the complete relativistically correct expression for the fields from a point particle moving arbitrarily.
 
Albertgauss said:
Where can I find a picture of the magnetic field lines produced by a charged particle moving near the speed of light?

I had the same problem an could find none, so I did it myself.

Is there a formula for the strength of B and direction of field lines as v --> c?

Of course there is. They are just Lorentz transformations of the EM tensor passing from the reference system in which the charge is at rest to a reference system in which it's moving with speed -v: in SI units,

E'x = Ex
E'y = γ(Ey − v Bz )
E'z = γ(Ez + v By )

B'x = Bx
B'y = γ(By + β/c Ez )
B'z = γ(Bz − β/c Ey )


Does this equation reduce to Ampere's right hand rule for a moving charge's ability to create classical circular magnetic field lines when the particle's velocity is non-relativistic?

Yes: in the above formulas, if S is the reference where the charge is at rest, Bx=By=Bz=0, and the last two become

B'y = γ( β/c Ez )
B'z = γ( − β/c Ey )

If γ ≈ 1, at low speeds, you obtain the Biot-Savart law for a non relativistic moving particle.

Is there an animation somewhere that shows the transition from circular, Ampere field lines at everyday velocities to relativistic field lines as the charged particle gets faster?

I'm afraid you have to do it yourself. I enclose below the gnuplot tool with which you can plot the field lines for several values of beta, and then join plots together in an animated gif. I'll try to do it, but it will take a while (both for me and for my CPU's).

I know that the electric field lines go from spherically symmetric to being bunched up like "Broomstick Hairs." I know that in relativity, E can be B in another frame and vice versa, but I'm not looking for transformations. I'm just watching the high energy particle go by and looking at its field lines.

For now, have a look to the transition of lines for:

v = 0.01 c << c (gamma = 1.00005..)
v = c/2 (gamma = 1.1547..)
v = c sqrt(3.)/2.(gamma = 2)
v = .99 c (gamma = 7.09..)

But before, let me explain the meaning of lines you'll see. To represent a vector field in a 3D space several choices can be made: e.g. little arrows here and there, or flux lines... Here, we can rely on the intrinsic problem's cylindrical simmetry, and concentrate to a xy plane, where x-axis is the charge's trajectory and y-axis is any straight line orthogonal to x passing throught the charge's instantaneous position. At any point of the xy plane, E is radial, i.e. directed to or from the charge in the origin (even at relativistic speeds); and B is orthogonal to the plane. So, the only additional information needed for each point is absolute value of fields: |E| and |B|.

I represent them with "level curves" iso|E| and iso|B|, lines where |E| and |B| have the same value (seen in legend).

In the first figure (non-relativistic speed), you can easily recognize iso|E| isolines: they are nearly perfect concentric circles. Other isolines are iso|B|.

Increasing v, isolines are deformed, but they remain recognizable.


Remember, the magnetic field flux lines are orthogonal to the screen, entering in it in a sempilane delimited by the x-axis and emerging from it in the other semiplane.


v << c (gamma = 1.00005..):

attachment.php?attachmentid=61255&stc=1&d=1377818248.png



v = c/2 (gamma = 1.1547..):

attachment.php?attachmentid=61256&stc=1&d=1377818248.png



v = c sqrt(3.)/2. such that gamma = 2

attachment.php?attachmentid=61257&stc=1&d=1377818248.png



v = .99 c (gamma = 7.09..)

attachment.php?attachmentid=61258&stc=1&d=1377818248.png




Also, I don't want to know about synchotron radiation or anything where the charged particle produces radiation. Those are cases for charged particle feeling an external field. I want to know about field lines created by relativistic particles.

Yes, I understand the problem: nearly all web pages found by Google with obvious appropriate keywords treat point charges moving in a field, not field generated by them :-(

The gnuplot script:


Code:
# gnuplot commands

# natural units system:
  c = 1.
  eps0 = 1.
  mu0=1.

# unitary charge
  q = 1.

# uncomment desired velocity
# or write it in gnuplot command line 
#   before pasting the whole script

# v << c (gamma = 1.00005..):
# v = .01

# v = c/2 (gamma = 1.1547..):
# v = .5

# v such that gamma = 2
# v = sqrt(3.)/2. 

# v/c = .99 (gamma = 7.09..)
# v = .99

# v/c = .999 (gamma = 22.4)
# v = .999

# v/c = .9999 (gamma = 70)
# v = .9999

  beta(v) = v/c
  Lorentz(v) = 1./sqrt(1-beta(v)**2)
# note: gamma() cannot be used, is a gnuplot intrinsic function

# Lorentz transformation of coordinates 
# from laboratory's reference system to 
# reference system where q is at rest
# (suffix r indicates the reference system where q is at Rest)

  tr(x,y,z,t) = Lorentz(v)*(t+beta(v)*x)
  xr(x,y,z,t) = Lorentz(v)*(x+v*t)
  yr(x,y,z,t) = y
  zr(x,y,z,t) = z

# E computed in reference where q is at rest (and B is zero):

  rsquare(xr,yr,zr) = xr**2+yr**2+zr**2
  r(xr,yr,zr) = sqrt(rsquare(xr,yr,zr))
  Er(xr,yr,zr,tr) = q/(4*pi*eps0)/rsquare(xr,yr,zr)
  Erx(xr,yr,zr,tr) = Er(xr,yr,zr,tr)*xr/r(xr,yr,zr)
  Ery(xr,yr,zr,tr) = Er(xr,yr,zr,tr)*yr/r(xr,yr,zr)
  Erz(xr,yr,zr,tr) = Er(xr,yr,zr,tr)*zr/r(xr,yr,zr)

# Lorentz transformation of EM tensor to Laboratory' reference (SI units):
#
#  E'x = Ex      
#  E'y = gamma(Ey - v Bz )  (but Bz=0)
#  E'z = gamma(Ez + v By )  (but By=0)
#
#  B'x = Bx
#  B'y = gamma(By + beta/c Ez )  (but By=0)
#  B'z = gamma(Bz - beta/c Ey )  (but Bz=0)


  Ex(x,y,z,t) =  Erx(xr(x,y,z,t),yr(x,y,z,t),zr(x,y,z,t),tr(x,y,z,t))
  Ey(x,y,z,t) = Lorentz(v)*Ery(xr(x,y,z,t),yr(x,y,z,t),zr(x,y,z,t),tr(x,y,z,t))
  Ez(x,y,z,t) = Lorentz(v)*Erz(xr(x,y,z,t),yr(x,y,z,t),zr(x,y,z,t),tr(x,y,z,t))

  E(x,y,z,t) = sqrt (Ex(x,y,z,t)**2 + Ey(x,y,z,t)**2 + Ez(x,y,z,t)**2)


  Bx(x,y,z,t) = 0.
  By(x,y,z,t) = Lorentz(v)*(-beta(v)/c*Ez(x,y,z,t) )    
  Bz(x,y,z,t) = Lorentz(v)*(+beta(v)/c*Ey(x,y,z,t) )  

  B(x,y,z,t) = sqrt (Bx(x,y,z,t)**2 + By(x,y,z,t)**2 + Bz(x,y,z,t)**2)


# graphic trick: fields goes to infinity approaching origin, 
# let's limit them to a max plottable value

  min(x,y) = (x < y) ? x : y
  Eplot(x,y,z,t) = min (1., E(x,y,z,t) )

# graphic trick: B increases with v even in non-relativistic cases,
# let's divide it by v so as to compare plots at different v.

  Bplot(x,y,z,t) = min (1., B(x,y,z,t)/v )

 set view map
 set size ratio -1
 unset surface
 set xrange [-1:1]
 set yrange [-1:1]
 set samples 500
 set isosamples 500
 set contour base
 set cntrparam levels auto 10 

 splot Eplot(x,y,0,0), Bplot(x,y,0,0)
 

Attachments

  • Gamma1.00005.png
    Gamma1.00005.png
    35.2 KB · Views: 1,018
  • Gamma1.15.png
    Gamma1.15.png
    36.4 KB · Views: 861
  • Gamma2.png
    Gamma2.png
    37.6 KB · Views: 873
  • Gamma7.png
    Gamma7.png
    35.1 KB · Views: 885
Wow, this is really good and is amazing. I have to work all this out but I definitely appreciate this. I couldn't find anything like the above anywhere.

Albert Gauss
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K