4
$\begingroup$

I'm aware there is a similar question about this: Bremsstrahlung vs energy conservation

However, I don't think the answer given actually answers the question, so I'll ask again:

Let's consider a high velocity electron passing close to a nucleus. As it moves away from the nucleus, it loses kinetic energy whilst increasing its electrical potential energy by the same amount.

There must be something missing in my understanding about the formation of bremsstrahlung. If all the electron's loss of kinetic energy is converted to electrical potential energy as it leaves the nucleus, where does the energy come from to create a radiated photon?

$\endgroup$
3
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ There is additional energy lost due to bremsstrahlung. That is, the electron looses more kinetic energy than it gains potential energy. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 27, 2018 at 21:46
  • $\begingroup$ Surely the fact that it's a force comparable to the gravitational force, the loss in kinetic energy is exactly equal to the gain in electrical potential energy? $\endgroup$
    – Kevin Gu
    Commented Apr 28, 2018 at 18:30
  • $\begingroup$ This is also not true for gravitation, there is a gravitational analogon "bremstrahlung". (Don't forget, massive binary objects in close orbits lose energy due to gravitational radiation). The point is that total energy is conserved (kinetic and potential of the particle plus radiated energy). Electrostatics and gravitostatics are nothing but $c \to \infty$ approximations. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 28, 2018 at 20:02

4 Answers 4

5
$\begingroup$

Short answer: the electron loses a bit more kinetic energy than you would expect by naive energy conservation. That extra energy is accounted for by the emitted light. Classically the reason the electron loses more energy is because it experiences a backward radiation reaction force on it when it emits the light.

Better answer: there's really no such thing as "potential energy". Energy is always the energy of something, like the kinetic energy of a particle or the energy density of a field. Potential energy as used in introductory physics is a placeholder for some kind of energy we don't want to keep track of explicitly. For example, the potential energy of two static charges $$U(r) = \frac{q_1 q_2}{4 \pi \epsilon_0 r}$$ is really the energy of the static electric field they create, up to a constant.

In this situation, there is electromagnetic field energy and electron kinetic energy. Some of the latter is transferred to the former. There is no reason to expect that all of this energy will be in the form of static field energy, since the electron is accelerating; some appears as radiation. There's nothing particularly weird or paradoxical about this.

$\endgroup$
13
  • $\begingroup$ I disagree with your statement that there is no such thing as potential energy. $\endgroup$
    – my2cts
    Commented Apr 28, 2018 at 11:06
  • $\begingroup$ @my2cts Can you give an example? $\endgroup$
    – knzhou
    Commented Apr 28, 2018 at 11:09
  • $\begingroup$ Potential energy is the part of the energy of an object the depends on its position, to be distinguished from kinetic energy, which depends on its velocity. The concept is used in every part of physics, so examples are everywhere. $\endgroup$
    – my2cts
    Commented Apr 28, 2018 at 12:50
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @my2cts The "potential energy" of a charge in a field is fundamentally just field energy. If you count both potential energy and field energy in your calculation, you will account for the same energy twice. Similarly the potential energy of a particle on a spring is really the energy of the atoms of the spring, and so on. Do you have a better example? $\endgroup$
    – knzhou
    Commented Apr 28, 2018 at 12:59
  • $\begingroup$ You have to come with sound arguments. Your reasoning in these posts is casual. Btw Feynman discussed field energy in his lectures. Do you agree with him or, if not, can you show that he is wrong? $\endgroup$
    – my2cts
    Commented Apr 28, 2018 at 13:18
1
$\begingroup$

If all the electron's loss of kinetic energy is converted to electrical potential energy as it leaves the nucleus,

Even in ideal Coulomb theory, not all kinetic energy is converted to potential energy; the nucleus is pulled by the electron and receives some kinetic energy as well. Then, both electron and nucleus move with non-zero acceleration.

In fully relativistic electromagnetic theory with only retarded interactions, two charged particles that move with acceleration will act on each other with EM forces that are not purely Coulombic. These forces are non-conservative; this means some energy will apparently get lost, so sum of kinetic energies after the encounter will be less than before. Of course, this lost energy is not actually lost, but will leak out from the system as EM energy flux, due to EM radiation such system produces.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Can you explain "two charged particles that move with acceleration will act on each other with EM forces that are not purely Coulombic."? $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 8, 2023 at 5:55
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Accelerated charged particles produce magnetic field, and electric field different than the Coulomb field - the field is compressed in direction of motion, and there is also the induced field component, proportional to acceleration. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 8, 2023 at 13:09
0
$\begingroup$

Potential energy is the part of the energy of an object the depends on its position, to be distinguished from kinetic energy, which depends on its velocity.

The concept is used in every part of physics, so examples are everywhere.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ This does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post. - From Review $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 28, 2018 at 12:39
  • $\begingroup$ The op is not asking a question. Instead he is making a statement. $\endgroup$
    – my2cts
    Commented Apr 28, 2018 at 13:20
0
$\begingroup$

This belongs to the quantum mechanical regime because, bremsstrahlung appears on individual electrons, and electrons are elementary particles, they must be described quantum mechanically, and here are the feynman diagrams"

brems

Potentials do not enter because in quantum electrodynamics their effect is taken over by the virtual photon exchanges.

There must be something missing in my understanding about the formation of bremsstrahlung. If all the electron's loss of kinetic energy is converted to electrical potential energy as it leaves the nucleus, where does the energy come from to create a radiated photon?

You are thinking classically about individual particles as an electron and a photon, that cannot be correct

The electron exchanges a virtual photon giving energy and momentum to the nucleus , and loses energy to a real photon.

Classically, if a charged particle decelerates it emits radiation. The diagram above is what happens at the quantum mecahnical correct level for electrons and photons and nuclei.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.