Order of Operations, Lorentz Transformations & Superposition

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the order of operations in applying the Lorentz transformation to fields and the superposition of electric fields generated by moving charges. Participants explore the implications of transforming electric potentials versus electric fields directly, particularly in the context of calculating the electric field in the far radiation zone for two moving electrons.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant outlines their approach of transforming the electric potential field from the rest frame of each electron to the lab frame before applying superposition to calculate the electric field.
  • Another participant suggests transforming the 4-vector potential instead of the electric field directly, implying this method should yield the same result.
  • Concerns are raised about the importance of the order of operations in this context, with participants expressing uncertainty about whether it affects the final outcome.
  • There is a request for calculations to better understand the implications of the order of operations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that both methods should lead to the same result, but there is no consensus on whether the order of operations is critical to achieving that result. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of the order of operations.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not provided complete calculations, which limits the ability to assess the validity of the approaches discussed. There is also a lack of clarity on the assumptions made during the transformations and calculations.

univox360
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
I am wondering about the order of operations concerning the Lorentz transformation of fields and the superposition of fields.

I was given a problem:

Two positively charged electrons start at the origin and then travel along the x-axis at a constant speed v in opposite directions. Calculate the electric field in the (far) radiation zone.

My approach was to first transform the electric potential field from each electron's rest frame to the lab frame. Then, in the lab frame I added the two fields together via superposition. Afterward, I calculated the electric field making approximations for the (far) radiation zone.

Is there something fundamentally wrong with this approach? Why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
univox360 said:
I am wondering about the order of operations concerning the Lorentz transformation of fields and the superposition of fields.

I was given a problem:

Two positively charged electrons start at the origin and then travel along the x-axis at a constant speed v in opposite directions. Calculate the electric field in the (far) radiation zone.

My approach was to first transform the electric potential field from each electron's rest frame to the lab frame. Then, in the lab frame I added the two fields together via superposition. Afterward, I calculated the electric field making approximations for the (far) radiation zone.

Is there something fundamentally wrong with this approach? Why?
[tex]E= \frac {Q}{4 \pi \epsilon_0 r^2}* \frac {1- \beta^2}{(1- \beta^2 sin^2 \theta) ^{3/2}}[/tex]

where
[tex]\beta = v/c}[/tex] and [tex]\theta[/tex] is the angle formed between the observer-charge axis and the direction of charge motion (the x-axis in your case).

So:

[tex]E_1= \frac {Q}{4 \pi \epsilon_0 r_1^2}* \frac {1- \beta_1^2}{(1- \beta_1^2 sin^2 \theta_1) ^{3/2}}[/tex][tex]E_2= \frac {Q}{4 \pi \epsilon_0 r_2^2}* \frac {1- \beta_2^2}{(1- \beta_2^2 sin^2 \theta_2) ^{3/2}}[/tex]

Now:

[tex]\beta_1=v/c=-\beta_2[/tex]So:

[tex]E_1= \frac {Q}{4 \pi \epsilon_0 r_1^2}* \frac {1- \beta^2}{(1- \beta^2 sin^2 \theta_1) ^{3/2}}[/tex][tex]E_2= \frac {Q}{4 \pi \epsilon_0 r_2^2}* \frac {1- \beta^2}{(1- \beta^2 sin^2 \theta_2) ^{3/2}}[/tex]

Add the two together and you get your result. Is this what you got?
 
Last edited:
I transformed the 4-vector potential due to both charges, not the electric field directly.
 
univox360 said:
I transformed the 4-vector potential due to both charges, not the electric field directly.

You should be getting the same answer.
 
Well, yes they must eventually come to the same answer. But I am more concerned with whether or not the order of operations is important.
 
univox360 said:
Well, yes they must eventually come to the same answer. But I am more concerned with whether or not the order of operations is important.

Can't tell without seeing your calcs. Post them and we'll talk.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 101 ·
4
Replies
101
Views
7K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K