Total Energy of Particle in Potential: SR Explanation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the total energy of a particle in a potential, particularly in the context of special relativity (SR) and electromagnetic fields. Participants explore the relationship between rest mass, potential energy, and the implications for energy conservation in systems with multiple charged particles.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether the total energy of a particle in a potential should include the potential energy term, suggesting two possible formulations: \(E=\gamma m_0 c^2 + E_{pot}\) or \(E=\gamma m_0 c^2\).
  • Another participant states that for the electromagnetic field, the conserved energy is given by \(E = \gamma mc^2 + q \Phi\), where \(\Phi\) is the electric potential.
  • A concern is raised about double counting potential energy when considering multiple charged particles, suggesting that potential energy could be allocated differently among particles or modeled using energy density in the field.
  • There is a question about the compatibility of the energy expressions with the equation \(E^2=c^2\cdot \mathbf{p}^2+m^2\cdot c^4\), particularly when comparing identical particles in different potential scenarios.
  • One participant argues that electric potential energy does not contribute to the inertia of the particle and resides in the field, while gravitational potential energy is considered part of the particle's energy and contributes to its inertia.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the role of potential energy in the total energy of a particle, with no consensus reached on how to account for potential energy in systems with multiple particles or how it relates to inertia.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight complexities in defining potential energy in electromagnetic versus gravitational contexts, noting the need for careful consideration of energy distribution in systems with multiple interacting particles.

greypilgrim
Messages
583
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   Reactions: stevendaryl

Similar threads

  • · Replies 82 ·
3
Replies
82
Views
7K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
2K