Potential Energy of Relativistic Particles in Coulomb Field

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the potential energy of a relativistic particle, specifically an electron, moving in a Coulomb field created by a fixed heavy nucleus. Participants explore the implications of relativistic effects on the potential energy, referencing different theoretical perspectives and historical derivations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant references Landau and Lifshitz, asserting that the potential energy remains as ##\frac{qQ}{r}## without renormalization.
  • Another participant introduces the idea that some authors propose a modified potential energy expression using a reduced distance ##r\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}##, suggesting this accounts for relativistic effects on linear dimensions.
  • A historical context is provided regarding the derivation of the relativistic equation of motion from the Lagrangian, noting its significance in the context of the hydrogen atom's fine structure.
  • Participants discuss the limitations of the historical model, mentioning that it does not account for the electron's spin and gyrofactor, which were unknown at the time of its formulation.
  • Technical details about LaTeX formatting are shared among participants, indicating a need for clarity in mathematical expressions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correct expression for potential energy in a relativistic context, with no consensus reached on which perspective is correct. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the validity of the proposed models.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the dependence on historical models and assumptions about relativistic effects, as well as the unresolved nature of the mathematical expressions involved.

reterty
Messages
30
Reaction score
2
Let us consider relativistic particle (electron) which moves with relativistic speed ##v## in the Coulomb field (in the field of a fixed heavy nucleus). The main question is what is the potential energy of a particle in such a static field? Landau and Lifshitz in their book "Field Theory" believe that the potential energy is not renormalized in any way and is equal to ##\frac{qQ}{r}##. At the same time, a number of authors of original articles on this topic introduce a reduced distance ##r\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}## into the denominator of this fraction due to the relativistic effect of the reduction in linear dimensions. Which of them is right?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I guess you mean the relativistic motion of a charged particle in the coulomb field of a very much heavier particle, neglecting the radiation reaction. The relativistic equation of motion in the non-covariant formalism is derived from the Lagrangian
$$L=-mc^2 \sqrt{1-\dot{\vec{x}}^2} + \frac{q Q}{4 \pi \epsilon_0 |\vec{x}|}.$$
It's of some historical interest since it was Sommerfeld's derivation of the fine structure of the hydrogen-atom spectrum within old quantum theory. It's kind of surprising that he got the correct result although the model is, of course, entirely wrong, i.e., it doesn't take into account the spin 1/2 of the electron and the gyrofactor 2 (both of which weren't known in 1916). That's why you find the solution in Wikipedia here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr–Sommerfeld_model#Relativistic_orbit
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark, PeroK and malawi_glenn
reterty said:
$r\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}$
Please note that on this website you need to use a double-$ instead of a single-$ for LaTeX to work.
$$r\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark
DrGreg said:
on this website you need to use a double-$ instead of a single-$ for LaTeX to work
Or a double # for inline LaTeX (the double $ means an equation in its own paragraph).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark and vanhees71
For example: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305345527_A_New_Relativistic_Extension_of_the_Harmonic_Oscillator_Satisfying_an_Isochronicity_Principle
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 108 ·
4
Replies
108
Views
9K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
2K