0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Why can't we translate to the frame where the electrons stay still instead? Will it change the expected result?
You could but it's harder. You lose the ability to assume the density of positive charge in the wire ≈ the density of negative charge in the wire in that frame. (I think I would just keep changing frames of reference in my head so that the wire was stationary). No it shouldn't change the overall result, the test charge would still be repelled, just for slightly different reasons.
If I assume that translation to the frame of the electrons is symmetrical to translation to the frame of the wire atoms anyway
Do we have to also take time dilation into account? why or why not?
The total pattern of movement of electrons is not quite as simple as moving so as to spread out uniformly along the wire. More generally, we actually do think that the electrons distribute themselves to be slightly more dense at the peripheral (outer edges of the wire) and slightly less dense at the core of the wire, that's how a net electric field along the wire is maintained and what drives the electrons along the wire with the usual drift velocity. The surface density of charge also changes very slightly as you progress along the wire from the +ve end of the cell to the -ve end - BUT overall, this is just complicated and not making a significant difference to the overall density of electrons along the wire anyway, it is almost uniform along the wire.
Quote from: Eternal Student on 30/06/2022 19:41:24Going back to your original frame of reference, the distance between the metal atoms would have been contracted slightly while the distance between the electrons would have been increased slightly compared to the frame I have just used. Overall there would have been a net +ve charge density in the wire and that would have created an Electric field that repelled the test particle.If in the next experiment the velocities are doubled to 2v, the classical Lorentz force would be quadrupled, because the electric current is doubled, so is the relative velocity between the test particle and the wire. Do we get the same results when using length contraction method? Do we have to also take time dilation into account? why or why not?
Going back to your original frame of reference, the distance between the metal atoms would have been contracted slightly while the distance between the electrons would have been increased slightly compared to the frame I have just used. Overall there would have been a net +ve charge density in the wire and that would have created an Electric field that repelled the test particle.
Here's a typical electrical circuit:
Have you tried to calculate the repulsive force when v is 1 mm/s?What happens to the force if the velocities are doubled?What must be done to make the force attractive instead of repulsive?
I seem to have CoVid
. A positive charge can be thought of a compression of space or a pulse of negative curvature. A negative charge can be thought of as a decompression of space or a pulse of positive curvature.
A charge can be thought as a rotating pulse in space from a particle's charge dipoles
Quote from: Spring Theory on 03/07/2022 00:45:08. A positive charge can be thought of a compression of space or a pulse of negative curvature. A negative charge can be thought of as a decompression of space or a pulse of positive curvature.That can't be correct it seems. If space was curving then all matter would be effected, but only charged particles are.
Quote from: Spring Theory on 03/07/2022 00:45:08 A charge can be thought as a rotating pulse in space from a particle's charge dipolesA rotation requires an axis. An electrostatic charge doesn't seem to have any.
The total effect of curvature is still the total mass or average mass of the particle. The dipole is a point like pulse of curvature. For negative particles, the convex curvature pulse subtracts from the overall curvature mass but not enough to make the mass less than zero.
For positive particles the concave curvature pulse adds a bit of gravitational curvature to the total mass of the particle.
Charged particles however create an attraction when a convex pulse meets a concave pulse from opposite directions because the result is a curvature that is intensified. A repulsion is created when like pulses interact because the result is the curvature is interference.
Of course this is my theory, hence located here in the speculative board.
The electron is an elementary particle, meaning it is one thing that cannot broken down any further.
According to the traditions
it has two properties; mass and negative charge.
But since we cannot break down the electron to isolate these two separate properties, implied by the traditions,
implied by the traditions, these two things do not exist, in the classic way, within the electron.
If you could break the electron down to mass and charge, the electron would not be an elementary particle.
To solve this paradox,
That is just word salad.
All charged particles have a magnetic moment due to its "intrinsic" spin.An intrinsic spin requires an intrinsic axis and hence a source for an instrisic pulse.
Quote from: Origin on 03/07/2022 16:04:18That is just word salad.Read it a few times and it will help you grasp the concept. It will be way over your head the first time.
Quote from: Spring Theory on 03/07/2022 23:07:53Quote from: Origin on 03/07/2022 16:04:18That is just word salad.Read it a few times and it will help you grasp the concept. It will be way over your head the first time.Reading it repeatedly will not help.It can not help because your word salad has phrases in it that do not have a meaning. (e.g. " dipole is a point like pulse of curvature"You have been asked to explain them.You failed to do so.Do not try to tell us that it is our fault that you refuse to make sense.