I Total Energy of Particle in Potential: SR Explanation

greypilgrim
Messages
579
Reaction score
44
Hi.

What is the total energy of a particle in a potential? Is it
$$E=\gamma m_0 c^2+E_pot$$
or is it still
$$E=\gamma m_0 c^2$$
where ##m_0## is a bigger mass than the particle would have in absence of the potential?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Specifically for the electromagnetic field, the conserved energy is given by:

E = \gamma mc^2 + q \Phi

where \Phi is the electric potential.
 
Note that if you have two or more charged particles, this simple model would say that each particle in a pair gets the full potential energy due to the other, which double counts the potential energy. For a collection of particles, one can simply allocate half of the potential energy to each one, or one can use an alternative model which takes into account energy density in the field.

(For gravity, where energy acts as a source so everything is non-linear, this gets much more complicated and as far as I know there isn't any satisfactory answer to where the equivalent of potential energy resides, not even in GR).
 
stevendaryl said:
Specifically for the electromagnetic field, the conserved energy is given by:

E = \gamma mc^2 + q \Phi

where \Phi is the electric potential.

But how does this work with
$$E^2=c^2\cdot \mathbf{p}^2+m^2\cdot c^4 \enspace ?$$
If we look at two identical particles with the same velocity where one is in an electric potential and the other is not, the right sides of this equation are the same, but not the energy squared on the left?
 
Electric potential energy is not part of the energy of the particle and does not contribute to its inertia. It is part of the energy of the system which includes the particle and the field, and the standard explanation is that it resides in the field, with an energy density proportional to the square of the field. Within the squared field expression, there are terms made up of the scalar product of the field components due to each pair of charged particles, and when each scalar product term is integrated over all space the result is equal to the potential energy between that pair of particles.

In contrast, gravitational potential energy (which is negative relative to the local rest mass) is part of the energy of the particle and is assumed to contribute its inertia, but to get the usual conservation laws to work (at least for a weak field approximation) there also has to be positive energy in the field which compensates for the double effect of each particle having the whole potential energy.
 
  • Like
Likes stevendaryl
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. The Relativator was sold by (as printed) Atomic Laboratories, Inc. 3086 Claremont Ave, Berkeley 5, California , which seems to be a division of Cenco Instruments (Central Scientific Company)... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/relativator-circular-slide-rule-simulated-with-desmos/ by @robphy
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...

Similar threads

Back
Top