Timeline for Are static magnetic and electric fields distorted by gravity? How?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 14, 2018 at 11:38 | comment | added | Andrew Steane | Yes the self-force would include the one named after Abraham and Lorentz, but it also includes the inertial term which diverges in the point limit. When you look at the field lines it is this inertial (infinite) term which stands out and is opposed to the acceleration. The remaining terms could be in either direction depending on the particular case. The complete series for my example is given in journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.91.065008 and the leading term after the diverging one is indeed of opposite sign, so AWAY from the horizon, just like black hole case. | |
| Nov 9, 2018 at 0:06 | comment | added | G. Smith | It's the next term in the sense that it's the finite part left over after an infinite term is absorbed by mass renormalization. I assume a similar calculation for your case of a uniform gravitational field would produce the Abraham-Lorentz force? Do you have any idea why the self-force in the uniform-field case is toward the "source" of the gravity and in the black hole case away from it? | |
| Nov 8, 2018 at 23:59 | history | edited | G. Smith | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 13 characters in body
|
| Nov 8, 2018 at 23:54 | comment | added | Andrew Steane | Thanks for the reference to Smith and Will. I note from the abstract the phrase "after mass renormalization". The largest part of the self-force is the inertial part, i.e. the part that can be accounted for by adjusting the mass. This part acts to oppose the acceleration of the charge relative to a local inertial frame, in other words towards the hole in this example (I assume the figure shows a charge at fixed distance from the hole). I expect the repulsive force you mention is the next term. (This is my quick reaction; I will check). | |
| Nov 8, 2018 at 23:47 | history | edited | G. Smith | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 307 characters in body
|
| Nov 8, 2018 at 23:39 | history | edited | G. Smith | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 8 characters in body
|
| Nov 8, 2018 at 23:35 | comment | added | G. Smith | @Anixx I am sure that the self-force on the charge -- when measured in a local, freely-falling frame momentarily at rest relative to the charge -- is repulsive. See journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.22.1276. | |
| Nov 8, 2018 at 23:25 | history | edited | G. Smith | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 529 characters in body
|
| Nov 8, 2018 at 23:18 | history | edited | G. Smith | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 529 characters in body
|
| Nov 8, 2018 at 13:12 | comment | added | Anixx | "the field is stronger in the direction away from the hole than in the direction toward the hole" - are u sure? the image in the other onswer show the opposite (as the lines denser closer to the horizon). | |
| Nov 5, 2018 at 7:31 | history | edited | G. Smith | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 14 characters in body
|
| Nov 5, 2018 at 7:22 | history | answered | G. Smith | CC BY-SA 4.0 |