Questions on reversed Coulomb force.

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the behavior of the Coulomb force under relativistic conditions, particularly in the context of Moeller scattering and electron-electron interactions. It is established that at high relativistic velocities, the attractive force between the nucleus and an electron can become repulsive. The conversation also explores the implications of Lorentz contraction on the strong nuclear force, questioning whether protons aimed at a nucleus from a distance perceive the distance as contracted, thus activating the strong force at distances typically considered too far. The participants clarify that Lorentz contraction is a perspective effect rather than a local physical change.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of relativistic physics and Lorentz transformations
  • Familiarity with Coulomb's law and electromagnetic forces
  • Knowledge of nuclear forces, specifically the strong nuclear force
  • Basic principles of particle physics and scattering processes
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of Lorentz contraction in particle physics
  • Study the principles of Moeller scattering in detail
  • Examine the relationship between relativistic velocities and electromagnetic field transformations
  • Investigate experimental evidence of strong force interactions at varying distances
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of advanced physics, and researchers interested in the nuances of relativistic effects on fundamental forces and particle interactions.

Robert Clark
Questions on reversed "Coulomb" force.

I've seen that with Moeller scattering, the attractive force between
the nucleus and the electron can become repulsive at high relativistic
velocities of the electron. What are the energies required for this to
occur?
Is there an analogous result between electrons, i.e., in electron-
electron scattering, where the repulsive force between them switches
to become attractive at high energies?
The strong nuclear force operates as an attractive force even between
protons at distances of the size of the nucleus, about 10^-15 m. This
works even for protons beamed towards a nucleus at short distances,
not necessarily already contained within a common nucleus.
But shouldn't this distance be frame dependent? If the protons are
aimed toward a nucleus but to be a longer distance away, shouldn't
they regard the distance to be Lorentz contracted at sufficiently high
velocity?
If the proton beam say was aimed to skirt the outside of an atoms
electron cloud at about 10^-10 m away from the nucleus, shouldn't a
Lorentz contraction factor of 10^5 cause the protons to regard the
distance to be within the 10^-15 distance to the nucleus at which the
strong force is active?
The proton has a rest energy of close to 1 GeV. So a Lorentz factor
of 10^5 would correspond to giving the proton an energy of 100 Tera
eV. Not even the LHC is expected to get this high. However, Fermilab
gets up to 1 TeV. If the proton beam was aimed to come within 10^-12 m
of the nucleus, where the strong force would not be expected to
operate, then Lorentz contraction should make the distance appear as
10^-15 m to the protons, where the strong force would operate. Has
such an effect been seen?
Bob Clark
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Robert Clark wrote:
[snip]

> But shouldn't this distance be frame dependent? If the protons are
> aimed toward a nucleus but to be a longer distance away, shouldn't
> they regard the distance to be Lorentz contracted at sufficiently high
> velocity?
> If the proton beam say was aimed to skirt the outside of an atoms
> electron cloud at about 10^-10 m away from the nucleus, shouldn't a
> Lorentz contraction factor of 10^5 cause the protons to regard the
> distance to be within the 10^-15 distance to the nucleus at which the
> strong force is active?[/color]
[snip]

1) Lorentz contraction is external viewer perspective not a local
physical alteration. The wheels of a relativistic choo-choo are not
elliptical.

http://bkocay.cs.umanitoba.ca/Students/Theory.html
The distorted cube

2) Lorentz contraction is the body coming right at your nose. A
grazing miss is Terrell rotation instead.

http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PR/v116/i4/p1041_1
Lit. cite
http://www.math.ubc.ca/~cass/courses/m309-01a/cook/terrell1.html
http://www.ibiblio.org/lunar/school/library/finilite.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrell_rotation

3) At relativsitic velocities electric and magnetic fields swap
identities. You've got a lot more calculation to do.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
8K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K