Insights The Electric Field Seen by an Observer: A Relativistic Calculation with Tensors

robphy
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
Messages
7,253
Reaction score
2,740
This Insight was inspired by the discussion in “electric field seen by an observer in motion“, which tries to understand the relation between two expressions:

the definition of the electric field as seen by an observer (expressed as an observer-dependent 4-vector, as decomposed from the Maxwell field tensor ##E_{a}=F_{ab}v^b##, as found in Wald’s General Relativity [p. 64, Eq (4.2.21)] )
the Lorentz Transformation of the Electric Field, in 3-vector form

I was going to reply to a comment on something I said (here) but then realized that my post was getting too large. So, here it is in the Insight.
\def\MACROS{}<br /> \def\hv{\hat v}<br /> \def\hw{\hat w}...
<br /> <br /> <a href="https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/the-electric-field-seen-by-an-observer-a-relativistic-calculation-with-tensors/" class="link link--internal">Continue reading...</a>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
  • Love
Likes Ibix, vanhees71, aliens123 and 4 others
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello,

Thank you for bringing this discussion to my attention. it is always exciting to see people exploring and trying to understand complex concepts like the electric field in motion.

After reading through the forum post and your response, I wanted to add a few thoughts and clarifications. Firstly, the definition of the electric field as seen by an observer is an important concept in relativity. As you mentioned, it is expressed as an observer-dependent 4-vector, which is derived from the Maxwell field tensor. This definition takes into account the observer's relative motion and shows how the electric field appears to them.

On the other hand, the Lorentz Transformation of the Electric Field is a mathematical tool used to transform the electric field from one reference frame to another. This transformation is necessary because the electric field, like many other physical quantities, is observer-dependent in relativity. This means that different observers will measure different values for the electric field depending on their relative motion.

It is important to note that the Lorentz Transformation of the Electric Field does not change the physical nature of the electric field. It simply shows how the field appears to different observers. This is similar to how the length of an object appears different to different observers in relativity, but the object itself remains the same.

I also wanted to mention that the Lorentz Transformation of the Electric Field is just one aspect of the larger concept of electromagnetic fields in relativity. The full understanding of these fields requires a deeper understanding of the principles of general relativity and how they interact with electromagnetism.

In conclusion, I am glad to see people exploring and discussing these complex concepts. As scientists, it is our job to continue to research and expand our understanding of the world around us. I hope this helps clarify some aspects of the discussion. Keep up the great work!

 
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top