Understanding Potential and Potential Energy in Relativistic Electrodynamics

  • Thread starter Thread starter pmb_phy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy
pmb_phy
Messages
2,950
Reaction score
1
I'm curious. How many of you know what potential is and potential energy is and what role it plays in relativistic electrodynamics. How many of you know the difference between 4-momentum and generalized 4-momentum. Do you know what the time component of each of these 4-vectors are?

Thanks

Pete
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'd answer a qualified yes to the first question - I would assume you're talking about the 4-version of the magnetic vector potential A if you started talking about 4-potentials in electrostatics, the 4-vector that generates the Faraday tensor when you take it's exterior derivative.

But it's possible that you'd be talking about something completely different the way things have been going :-)

As far as generalized momentum goes, I'd answer qualified no. Usually a generalized momentum is derived from a Lagrangian, so I'd guess that that's what you were doing, but I don't think I've seen people talk about generalized 4-momenta.
 
pervect said:
I'd answer a qualified yes to the first question - I would assume you're talking about the 4-version of the magnetic vector potential A if you started talking about 4-potentials in electrostatics, the 4-vector that generates the Faraday tensor when you take it's exterior derivative.
Yes and no. There is a relativistic generalized potential which appears in the Lagrangian. Off the top of my head (and check me on this) this is U = qA*u - q*Phi. The Phi is the Coulomb potential. V = q*Phi is the potential energy of the charged particle in an EM field. The total energy, W, is an integral of motion and has the value

W = K + E_o + V

where V = potential energy.

As far as generalized momentum goes, I'd answer qualified no. Usually a generalized momentum is derived from a Lagrangian, so I'd guess that that's what you were doing, but I don't think I've seen people talk about generalized 4-momenta.
Its well worth your time to check into this. I recommend Goldstein's "Classical Mechanics - 3rd Ed."

I think this is an interesting subject myself. I've been thinking about it more lately and will be making new web pages to describe/discuss it (better than trying to post it all here in Latex :smile: ) But I have to wait until my modem comes. Its being shipped by UPS and will be here within a week. I'll be back more then and can get more detailed then too.

One interesting notion is the idea of gauge transformation. E.g. if you take the make the following gauge transformation A -> A + grad Psi, then you have to change Phi to Phi -> Phi - @Psi/@t (@ = partial derivative). Psi is a function of space and time. Then the electric field

E = -grad Phi - @A/@t

becomes

E = -grad (Phi - @Psi/@t) - @(A + grad Psi)/@t

which simplifies to

E = -grad Phi - @A/@t

and therefore the field remains unchanged as it must. But if you make this gauge transformation in the Lagrangian then what you're really doing is adding d(Psi)/dt to the original Lagrangian. Since this is the time derivative of a function of space and time it can be deleted from the Lagrangian since both L and L' = L + d(Psi)/dt yield the exact same equations of motion. However the time component of the generalized 4-momentum changes from W to W + @Psi/@t. In such a case the time component of the generalized 4-momentum is no longer the total energy. Interesting stuff.


Happy Thanksgiving by the way!

Pete
 
Last edited:
Nice work there pmb phy! Thanks.
 
speeding electron said:
Nice work there pmb phy! Thanks.

You're most welcome. Please call me Pete. :smile:

I plan on making many more. During the worst part of my convelesance (i.e. back surgery) I had plenty of time to think about some of the more tricky things.


That one topic was in response to someone (whom shall remain nameless since its from another forum/newsgroup) who claimed that potential and potential energy is meaningless in special relativity. I used the Coulomb potential as an example since its the time component of a 4-vector, i.e. the 4-potential. That person's response was to claim that since the time component can be transformed away by a gauge transformation then it was meaningless. I found that impossible to believe and it seemed like a vastly mislead comment. It seemed to me that such a claim was meant to imply that since the Phi can be transformed away that what it does also goes away by such a transformation. However as those calculations show - the gauge transformation can null out the time component of the 4-potential but it does nothing to the total energy and hence it does nothing to the potential energy.

I later realized that I ended up answering two homework questions from Goldstein's Classical Mechanics - 3rd Ed text. :smile:

So it was a useful exercise. Glad you liked it. There's a bunch of stuff I want to write up that can't be found in texts so that's how I'll be spending my time during the rest of my convelesance.

Pete
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. The Relativator was sold by (as printed) Atomic Laboratories, Inc. 3086 Claremont Ave, Berkeley 5, California , which seems to be a division of Cenco Instruments (Central Scientific Company)... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/relativator-circular-slide-rule-simulated-with-desmos/ by @robphy
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
Back
Top