What Are the Electric and Magnetic Fields in the Laboratory Frame?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around determining the electric and magnetic fields of a charged wire in a laboratory frame, emphasizing the need for proper problem-solving approaches. Participants express frustration over a lack of initial solution attempts, highlighting the importance of demonstrating understanding before seeking help. One user successfully solves the problem but criticizes the unhelpful responses received. The conversation underscores the expectation that users engage with the material and conduct preliminary research before asking for assistance. Overall, the thread illustrates the balance between seeking help and the responsibility to show effort in learning.
sludgethrower
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Here is an interesting question (units are Gaussian):

An infinitely long strgiht wire of negligible corss-sectional area is at rest and has a uniform lineare charge density q_0 in the inertial fram K'. The frame K' (and the wire) move with a velocity v parallel to the direction of the wire with respect the the laboratory frame K.

(a) What are the electric and magnetic fields in the laboratory?

(b) What are the charge and current densities associated with the wire in the laboratory?




Relevant equations - Probably Lorentz Transforms, Maxwell Equations...



Solution Attempt - None
 
Physics news on Phys.org
"None" is not an appropriate attempt at a solution.

As a hint, you might want to start by finding the electric and magnetic fields in frame K'.
 
That first comment gabbagabbahey is really very unhelpful. What is one to do if they can't even begin to tackle a question? Surely that is is the best reason possible to ask for help! In future posts, would you prefer me to write down some wrong physics that I know is completely incorrect, just to satisfy you..?

Anyway I managed to solve this problem...
 
sludgethrower said:
That first comment gabbagabbahey is really very unhelpful. What is one to do if they can't even begin to tackle a question? Surely that is is the best reason possible to ask for help! In future posts, would you prefer me to write down some wrong physics that I know is completely incorrect, just to satisfy you..?

Anyway I managed to solve this problem...

His comment was entirely appropriate. Please re-read the Rules link at the top of the page, especially the part about showing your attempt at a solution. We do not do your work for you -- you at least need to read your textbook and do your best to learn how to do the problems. If you have no clue how to start, read some more, do some more research -- asking at the PF is not considered doing research...
 
When I have worked out my own solution, I want to see if it is correct...the textbook I am using provides no solution. It is best to verify the plausibility of a solution if two people have done the problem independently. Even then, you can still learn even if both solutions are correct as the other person may have taken a different approach.

If the moderators of this board are going to be stubborn, and refuse to exchange their knowledge, then this is obviously not the site for me. I actually discovered this site through the brilliant site "mathlinks": the people that use the site are genarally pure mathematicians, rather than theoretical physicists. Would someone kindly refer me to a different site where people will happily share their wisdom?
 
sludgethrower said:
When I have worked out my own solution, I want to see if it is correct...the textbook I am using provides no solution. It is best to verify the plausibility of a solution if two people have done the problem independently. Even then, you can still learn even if both solutions are correct as the other person may have taken a different approach.

If the moderators of this board are going to be stubborn, and refuse to exchange their knowledge, then this is obviously not the site for me. I actually discovered this site through the brilliant site "mathlinks": the people that use the site are genarally pure mathematicians, rather than theoretical physicists. Would someone kindly refer me to a different site where people will happily share their wisdom?

If you are unwilling (or unable) to post the relevant equations and show your work on the homework/coursework problem, then yes, this is not the website for you. Best of luck.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top