Why Do Relativistic Particles Lose Energy Quickly?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the energy loss of relativistic particles as they traverse a material, particularly in relation to their speed compared to slower particles. Participants explore the mechanisms behind energy loss, including the influence of electric fields and Lorentz contraction.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that slower particles lose energy due to longer exposure to electric fields, questioning why relativistic particles also experience rapid energy loss.
  • Another participant challenges the initial claim, stating that it is not universally true that relativistic particles lose energy more quickly than slower ones, noting that there is a minimum energy loss per distance at relativistic speeds.
  • A participant expresses confusion about the energy loss of relativistic particles compared to those at intermediate speeds, proposing that Lorentz contraction might lead to a more concentrated electric field affecting energy loss.
  • Reference is made to the Bethe formula, indicating that electrons experience a more concentrated field from fast particles, with a minimum energy loss occurring around a Lorentz factor of ##\gamma = 3##, which is within the relativistic range.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit disagreement regarding the energy loss characteristics of relativistic versus slower particles, with no consensus reached on the mechanisms or comparative rates of energy loss.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the influence of electric fields and Lorentz contraction on energy loss, as well as the specific conditions under which these claims apply.

rwooduk
Messages
757
Reaction score
59
I understand that slower particles will be subject to the electric fields of the material for longer and lose energy, but why should relativistic particles also lose energy quickly?

The only idea we have is that there is a lorentz contraction of the electric field, BUT why then would that influence the traversing particle more?

thanks for any ideas.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Quicker than what, slower particles? Why do you think they would do that?
As general as you wrote it here, this is not true. For most charged particles there is a minimum of energy loss per distance at relativistic speeds - slower particles lose much more energy, faster particles lose a bit more.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: rwooduk
mfb said:
Quicker than what, slower particles? Why do you think they would do that?
As general as you wrote it here, this is not true. For most charged particles there is a minimum of energy loss per distance at relativistic speeds - slower particles lose much more energy, faster particles lose a bit more.

Hm, as I understood it slow moving particles and relativistic particles lose energy more quickly than those inbetween those speeds. I was trying to understand why relativistic particles will lose energy more quickly than those at 'intermediate' speeds. If the field is lorenz contracted then would it see a more "concentrated" field?
 
The electrons see a more "concentrated" field from the fast particle in the Bethe formula, right.

The minimum is roughly at ##\gamma = 3## which is certainly in the relativistic region.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: rwooduk
mfb said:
The electrons see a more "concentrated" field from the fast particle in the Bethe formula, right.

The minimum is roughly at ##\gamma = 3## which is certainly in the relativistic region.

Great. Many thanks for the replies!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K