What are the derivations, uses, and limitations of the extended Coulomb's Law?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on an extended version of Coulomb's Law that incorporates terms for moving charges, which is compared to the Lorentz force equation to explain electrical forces in magnetism. The equation presented, F_{on 2 by 1} = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}} \frac{q_{1}q_{2}}{r^{2}}[ \widehat{r} + \frac{1}{c^{2}} \cdot \vec{v_{2}} \times ( \vec{v_{1}} \times \widehat{r})], is critiqued for being inaccurate, particularly in its treatment of the second term, which is said to require order v^2 corrections. The conversation seeks more information on the derivations, uses, and limitations of this extended law. Participants express a need for clarification on the correct formulation of the equation. Overall, the thread highlights the complexities of applying Coulomb's Law to moving charges and the necessity for precise mathematical representation.
bicabone
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
My physics professor gave us an extended version of coulombs law which includes terms to account for moving charges. He then used (or rather compared) this law to the Lorentz force equation to give us a feel for the electrical forces generated by moving charges as he introduced us to magnetism. Does anyone know where I can find more information regarding this following equation (i.e. its derivations, uses, limitations, etc.)

F_{on 2 by 1} = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}} \frac{q_{1}q_{2}}{r^{2}}[ \widehat{r} + \frac{1}{c^{2}} \cdot \vec{v_{2}} \times ( \vec{v_{1}} \times \widehat{r})]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This should come from the nonrelativistic limit of the field of a moving point charge, which you most easily obtain by a Lorentz boost of the four-vector potential of a charge at rest:

{A'}^{\mu}=(q/(4 \pi |\vec{x}'|),0,0,0).
 
That equation is never right.
Even in the non-relativistic limit, the second term is of order v^2, so order v^2 corrections to the first term are required.
 
That equation is never right.

Perhaps you can tell us what it should be.
 
\frac{d{\bf p}}{dt}=<br /> \frac{-qq&#039;[{\bf r}+{\bf v\times(v&#039;\times r)}]}<br /> {\gamma_{v&#039;}^2[{\bf r}^2-({\bf v&#039;\times r)^2}]^{\frac{3}{2}}},<br />
 
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.

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
44
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
42
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top