Two controversial observations.

[Kramer]

 

Two controversial observations.
(A lay man confused in elementary physics knowledge)

In this ugly sketch are two frames: first in movement with V velocity in X direction. , the second frame is in rest.
In the moving frame are two electric charges with the same sign, and the observer (Kramer I). They don’t feel the movement.
For the Kramer I-- the charges are not moving, He used Coulomb law and determine that charges which have the same sign create a force that repels each other.
In the rest frame is another observer --- Kramer II. He observe a different phenomena: there are two electric charges, which have the same sign and are moving parallel in X direction with V velocity.
The moving charges create electromagnetic fields, which interacting with each other, create an attractive force between charges.
Question: How can coexist two different reality? Which Kramer is wrong?

[swansont]

Two controversial observations. (A lay man confused in elementary physics knowledge)

 

In this ugly sketch are two frames: first in movement with V velocity in X direction. , the second frame is in rest.

In the moving frame are two electric charges with the same sign, and the observer (Kramer I). They don’t feel the movement.

For the Kramer I-- the charges are not moving, He used Coulomb law and determine that charges which have the same sign create a force that repels each other.

In the rest frame is another observer --- Kramer II. He observe a different phenomena: there are two electric charges, which have the same sign and are moving parallel in X direction with V velocity.

The moving charges create electromagnetic fields, which interacting with each other, create an attractive force between charges.

Question: How can coexist two different reality? Which Kramer is wrong?

 

 

 

[/size]

Neither one is necessarily wrong, as you have not said what the net force is in the Kramer II case. There is an attractive force, and a repulsive force. The repulsion is bigger, so there is no contradiction.

[pwagen]

Am I missing something, or is there no sketch?

[Kramer]

 

Swansont
Neither one is necessarily wrong, as you have not said what the net force is in the Kramer II case. There is an attractive force, and a repulsive force. The repulsion is bigger, so there is no contradiction.

--------Thanks. It was very helpful.
But---- ( Don’t mind superficiality and curiosity of Kramer II –they are annoying like horse fly)
But… may I hasten two conclusion - question ?:

1 – Two electric charges, moving parallel each other, with relativistic velocity, have a limited electromagnetic interaction between 0 and double, via FE +,-- FB.
2 – Isn’t this phenomena troublesome in accelerators, and hasn’t it been observed as a fact?

Pugwen
Am I missing something, or is there no sketch?

Sorry. I tried …but drawing was so ugly that my computer was embarrassed and refused to send and paste over there. Again -- sorry for my computer…

[swansont]

 

1 – Two electric charges, moving parallel each other, with relativistic velocity, have a limited electromagnetic interaction

 

Yes

 

 

between 0 and double, via F[/size]E[/size] +,-- F[/size]B[/size].

 

I don't know what you mean by that.

 

 

2 – Isn’t this phenomena troublesome in accelerators, and hasn’t it been observed as a fact?

[/size]

 

Yes, it is and it has. The beam tends to diverge because the particles repel. You put "ion optics" components in the beam line to compensate.

[Kramer]

 

Swansont

I don't know what you mean by that.

------I said:
1 – Two electric charges, moving parallel each other, with relativistic velocity, have a limited electromagnetic interaction between 0 and double, via FE +,-- FB.
a) Two electric charges with the same sign, moving parallel each other in opposite senses, both with relativistic velocity the limit of which is ”C” have a repelling electromagnetic interaction equal FE + FB = 2FE = 2FB that’s mean double.
b) Two electric charges with the same sign, moving parallel each other in same senses, both with relativistic velocity the limit of which is ”C” have an attractive electromagnetic interaction equal FE -- FB = 0.
c) Two electric charges with different signs, moving parallel each other in same senses, both with relativistic velocity the limit of which is ”C” have an attractive electromagnetic interaction equal FE -- FB = 0.
d) Two electric charges with different signs, moving parallel each other in opposite senses, both with relativistic velocity the limit of which is ”C” have an attractive electromagnetic interaction equal FE + FB = 2FE =2FB.
I will continue. Please correct reasons of Kramer II.
If we have a bunch of electrons or protons in accelerator, this is the case b)
If we have in accelerator, let say a gold ion and I suppose is not stripped by all electrons, this case is much more complicated, because particles in gold ion will continue to move in their own movement plus will take place in common movement of ion, from accelerator.
In the case of golden ion , inside it , we’ll have the fore kind of combinations and I think exist possibility that he will blow up or will collapse in mini black hole.
I suppose that this may happens even if “V” <”C”.

[swansont]

FE is electric force and FB is magnetic force? (The is a subscript option in the edit bar, it makes it easier to figure out. F_E , F_B )

 

Massive particles can never reach c, so there is never a complete doubling or cancellation. Meaning that like charges still repel at any speed v < c

[Kramer]

 

Swansont.

FE is electric force and FB is magnetic force? (The is a subscript option in the edit bar, it makes it easier to figure out. F_E , F_B )

Massive particles can never reach c, so there is never a complete doubling or cancellation. Meaning that like charges still repel at any speed v < c

----Well. All right. Seems that FB / FE = V^2 / ε0 * μ0
I thought that as “V” is in square, this mean is not the same case as in Lorentz transformations where we have to do with only “V”, and wondered if “FB” may excel that case. I was wrong.
Doesn’t it ring something strange and interesting that magnetic force is linked direct with Einstein “gamma” when electric force-- isn’t ?.
I think that next calculation confirm even for the magnetic force hypothesis that electron particle is structured by two Unique particle and that they move with C velocity parallel each other.
Unique particle posses all data for those calculations:
1) FBe = (μ*e^2*C^2) / (4*pi*re^2) = 29.05350855 N.
2) FEe = e^2 / ( 4*pi*ε0*re^2) = 29.05350855 N.
3) Fme = (G*Mup^2) / re^2 = 29.0535972 N.
4) Fce = ((C*Vg) / sqrt G))^2 = 29.05350555 N.