Validity of application of Coulomb's Law with moving charge?

AI Thread Summary
Coulomb's Law is primarily valid for static charges, as moving charges introduce magnetic forces and retardation effects. In introductory physics problems, such as a moving charge in a uniform electric field, it is often treated as static from the charge's perspective, allowing the use of F = qE. This approach is reasonable if the other charges remain fixed and the moving charge's speed is significantly less than the speed of light. However, in scenarios involving multiple moving charges, such as two particles accelerating towards each other, magnetic effects cannot be ignored, and energy loss due to radiation may occur. Overall, while simplifications are common in introductory texts, they may overlook complexities that arise in more advanced treatments.
Alexander83
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
Hi there,
I'm trying to brush up on some of my E&M and am comparing treatments of Coulomb's Law in introductory calculus-based texts with higher level material. My understanding was that Coulomb's Law (and by extension, calculation of the electrostatic force on a charged particle using F = qE) was really strictly only valid when the charges were perfectly static. My understanding is that this is due to the fact that magnetic forces arise when there is motion of charges and as well that there are retardation effects if electric fields vary rapidly. I've run into two problems in these introductory texts that have me questioning some of my understanding of electrostatics.

Problem #1

A common problem that is introduced in first-year textbooks is the case of a moving charge like an electron undergoing projectile motion while in a uniform E-field. This is usually treated by considering the moving charge, working out the net force from the constant electric field and calculating characteristics of the trajectory under similar considerations to projectile motion. My question is concerning the validity of using the F = qE equation in this context.

This is clearly not a purely static situation, but my supposition is that it works because there is only the one charge moving around and all of the other source charges remain fixed so from the perspective of the mobile charge it's a "static" situation. As well, from the perspective of the one mobile charge, the other charges would not be in motion, so there ought to be no magnetic fields acting on it, and thus the magnetic force can be neglected. Is this interpretation correct or are there additional factors that are being papered over at an introductory level?

Problem #2

A second common type of problem is introduced along with the electrical potential energy for point charges. It involves two charged particles (such as a proton and an electron) that are released from rest and are allowed to accelerate towards each other and the problem asks to determine the speed of the particles when they are a certain distance apart. Here, magnetic forces surely cannot be neglected (since there are two moving charges), but is it still reasonable to solve this type of problem just using the concept of changes in electrical potential energy? Does this really give the correct answer even if magnetic effects are present? I would imagine that there would also have to be some loss of energy due to the production of radiation as the charges accelerate?

I would greatly appreciate if anyone out there could add any clarity to these questions and point out any misconceptions I have.

Thanks!

Alexander.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Alexander83 said:
My question is concerning the validity of using the F = qE equation in this context.
That is perfectly valid in the frame where the electric field is static.
From the perspective of the charge moving through the lab, the capacitor plates are moving and things are more complicated.

#2
Neglecting the magnetic field and assuming the electric field to perfectly follow the charges is a good approximation as long as the speed of the particles is slow compared to the speed of light. At a point where this is can become wrong you need quantum mechanics anyway.
 
  • Like
Likes Alexander83
Thank you, mfb. Your answer makes good sense and helps a lot!

Cheers, Alex.
 
Thread 'Inducing EMF Through a Coil: Understanding Flux'
Thank you for reading my post. I can understand why a change in magnetic flux through a conducting surface would induce an emf, but how does this work when inducing an emf through a coil? How does the flux through the empty space between the wires have an effect on the electrons in the wire itself? In the image below is a coil with a magnetic field going through the space between the wires but not necessarily through the wires themselves. Thank you.
Thread 'Griffith, Electrodynamics, 4th Edition, Example 4.8. (Second part)'
I am reading the Griffith, Electrodynamics book, 4th edition, Example 4.8. I want to understand some issues more correctly. It's a little bit difficult to understand now. > Example 4.8. Suppose the entire region below the plane ##z=0## in Fig. 4.28 is filled with uniform linear dielectric material of susceptibility ##\chi_e##. Calculate the force on a point charge ##q## situated a distance ##d## above the origin. In the page 196, in the first paragraph, the author argues as follows ...

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
44
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
855
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Back
Top