B Why doesn't a charged particle moving at a constant speed radiate?

AI Thread Summary
A charged particle moving at a constant speed does not radiate electromagnetic (EM) waves despite changes in the electric field as it approaches or recedes from an observer. The energy associated with the fields remains localized around the charge, and the Poynting vector indicates no energy flow away from it. While the changing fields can be expressed as a sum of sine waves through Fourier transform, they interfere destructively at distances from the source, preventing radiation. Even with constant proper acceleration, a particle does not radiate in its own rest frame. Therefore, the conditions for producing EM waves are not met in this scenario.
alikim
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
If I stand by a flying with constant speed charged particle, at my location the electric field will change as the particle get closer and further from me. So this change in electric field should create magnetic field and so on, producing an EM wave?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The simplest argument is energy conservation. If the charge radiated, where would the energy carried by the radiation come from? If the charge is accelerating it comes from whatever is doing the acceleration, but if it is moving at a steady speed there is no energy source.

Looking at the fields, the electric field is radial from the charge and the magnetic field is axisymmetric about the direction of motion. If you compute the Poynting vector you will see that the energy flows along with the charge - unsurprisingly given that the field remains localised around the charge. So there's no flow of energy away from the charge. In short, an EM wave is a particular pattern of changing electric and magnetic fields, and although there are changing electric and magnetic fields here they are not the right pattern to be an EM wave.

It's worth noting that you can always use the Fourier transform to write a changing EM field as a sum of inifinitely many sine waves. So it is possible to write this field as a sum of waves, but they interfere destructively away from the source so no energy is radiated even if you view the EM field this way.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes DaveE, alikim and Dale
alikim said:
If I stand by a flying with constant speed charged particle, at my location the electric field will change as the particle get closer and further from me. So this change in electric field should create magnetic field and so on, producing an EM wave?
Note that even if a particle undergoes constant proper acceleration, it doesn't radiate in its own rest frame.
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Hello! I am generating electrons from a 3D gaussian source. The electrons all have the same energy, but the direction is isotropic. The electron source is in between 2 plates that act as a capacitor, and one of them acts as a time of flight (tof) detector. I know the voltage on the plates very well, and I want to extract the center of the gaussian distribution (in one direction only), by measuring the tof of many electrons. So the uncertainty on the position is given by the tof uncertainty...
Back
Top