Question about orbiting charges

  • Thread starter Thread starter Inquisiter
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Charges
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the radiation emitted by classical charges that are either orbiting or spinning. It explores whether the total radiated power from a charge that is both orbiting and spinning can be approximated as the sum of the powers from each motion. The conversation highlights that a spinning charge does not radiate due to constant electric and magnetic fields, while an orbiting charge does. It also addresses the implications of charge distribution on radiation, particularly in superconducting rings, where radiation is minimal due to cancellation effects. Ultimately, the conversation concludes that while instantaneous power can be discussed, the conditions under which radiation occurs depend on the motion and distribution of the charges involved.
Inquisiter
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Imagine a charge (I'm talking about CLASSICAL charges, NOT electrons in an atom) which is orbiting amother much more massive charge. The charge will radiate, call the power it radiates p. Now imagine a charge spinning on it's axis (but not orbiting, just spinning), it will also radiate(we can divide the charge into small chunks, these chunks are accelerating, so they radiate), call the power q. Now if the charge is BOTH orbiting another charge and spinning on it's axis (with the same angular velocity), will the radiated power be p+q? If not, when will it be at least approximately p+q? Will the radiated power depend of the tilt of the axis of the charge?

Follow up question: Can we talk about the instantaneous power that a charge is radiating, or can we only talk about average power? Why or why not?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The spinning charge will not radiate, because the electric and magnetic field will be constant and time independent. Or yor may say that the radiation from different "chunks" will cancel each other.

Of course we can speak about the instant power.
 
Last edited:
Now, if we consider the charge both orbiting and spinning, then the radiated power will be different, because you will have an oscillating quadrupole magnetic moment. If their frequency are not harmonics, then we can average the radiated power separetely.
 
shyboy said:
The spinning charge will not radiate, because the electric and magnetic field will be constant and time independent. Or yor may say that the radiation from different "chunks" will cancel each other.
Hm, I was sort of suspecting that... It's just that I read that electrons in a superconductive ring are accelerating and must radiate according to classical physics, and the reason they don't radiate is quantum mechanical. I guess that classically for the spinning sphere or ring to not radiate the distribution of charge must be continous. Otherwise, the radiation from different chunks (electrons in this case) won't completely cancel each other. So classically, the electrons in a superconductive ring WOULD radiate (although the radiation would be very weak)? So, if you have two positive charges on the different ends of a spinning rod, the radiation will be very weak, since the radiation from one charge pretty much cancels the radiation from another charge. But what if the rod is spinning so quickly that the wavelength is much shorter than the length of the rod? Will the radiation be significant then? OH, or is that not even possible since the charges can't be moving faster than light?!
 
Last edited:
The electrons in a superconducting ring will not radiate for classical reasons, because all the multipoles would be constant. Classical QM itself cannot forbid the radiation from the superconducting ring, because in classical QM radiation occurs during the transition between the different states. The superconducting ring can have many states just like atom has. But to calculate the probability of the transition we need to use the classical electrodynamics.
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
It may be shown from the equations of electromagnetism, by James Clerk Maxwell in the 1860’s, that the speed of light in the vacuum of free space is related to electric permittivity (ϵ) and magnetic permeability (μ) by the equation: c=1/√( μ ϵ ) . This value is a constant for the vacuum of free space and is independent of the motion of the observer. It was this fact, in part, that led Albert Einstein to Special Relativity.
Back
Top