1
$\begingroup$

In an article of wikipedia, it is stated that :

Charge is the fundamental property of matter that exhibits electrostatic attraction or repulsion in the presence of other matter with charge.

I can't understand why there is "electrostatic" mentioned in this statement. Isn't there attraction or repulsion between two moving charge too?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
3
$\begingroup$

Yes, moving charges can repel and attract each other, but that is not only due to their electrostatic fields. The force that one moving charge (let's say A) applies on the other (let's say B) is the net resultant of the force due to the magnetic and electric fields produced by A. To define solely electric charges, we need to use their most basic property of producing an electric field (and thus exerting a force on another charged particle). So we use the term "electrostatic" which ensures that only the static electric field (which is by the virtue of an electric charge) is taken into account.

I would say this is not a conceptual physics doubt but rather a question on how a definition is framed (the semantics of defining something).

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for your good answer. i think this answer is excellent. But i think charge causes not only electric field but also magentic field because moving charge makes magnetic field. Then, can the sentence , "Charge is the fundamental property of matter that exhibits attraction or repulsion in the presence of other matter with charge." which is exclude "electrostatic", can be considered as reasonable one? $\endgroup$
    – KHJ
    Commented Nov 4, 2023 at 9:27
  • $\begingroup$ You could very well define that, but moving charge has been categorised as current, which is considered as one of 7 the fundamental quantities. So your definition would be applicable for a moving charge too, but just because current has already been defined, we only use the definition that applies solely to a charge $\endgroup$
    – Ham Lemon
    Commented Nov 4, 2023 at 12:09
-1
$\begingroup$

Firstly, there is no such thing as electrostatics, which is an idealization. Electrostatics ensures that a system of charges may not remain under equilibrium, and they all start moving in no time. So what is written in there is only true as an approximation.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$

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.