-1
$\begingroup$

*If two charges are moving uniformly with parallel velocity vectors that are not perpendicular to the line joining the charges, then the net mutual forces are equal and opposite but do not lie along the vector between the charges. Consider, further, two charges moving (instantaneously) so as to "cross the T," i.e., one charge moving directly at the other, which in turn is moving at right angles to the first. Then the second charge exerts a nonvanishing magnetic force on the first, without experiencing any magnetic reaction force at that instant.

Its a statement from Goldstein: Classical Mechanics Chapter 1: Survey of the Elementary Particles. Please help me what this statement means.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Please use a descriptive title. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 2, 2019 at 20:02
  • $\begingroup$ Nobert Schuch, I do not know what does that mean and how to go about asking questions on this site. I am new to this site, please if you can guide me it would be appreciated. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 2, 2019 at 20:07
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Welcome to Physics! 1. Please do not post images of texts you want to quote, but type it out instead so it is readable for all users and so that it can be indexed by search engines. For formulae, use MathJax instead. 2. Please consider writing better question titles, as described in this meta post. 3. Be more specific about what you don't understand about this statement - it is currently unclear what exactly you expect answerers to explain. $\endgroup$
    – ACuriousMind
    Commented Jan 2, 2019 at 20:15

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

This is a description of how electromagnetic forces on moving charges differ from the forces found in non-relativistic Newtonian mechanics. (Electromagnetism is an automatically relativistic theory, and the existence of magnetic forces is actually a relativistic correction.) Newtonian forces obey not just Newton's Third Law (that the force on $A$ due to $B$ is equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to the force on $B$ due to $A$); there is also a "strong form" of Newton's Third Law, which states that, in addition, the direction of the forces lie along the line connecting the two bodies. This additional condition is needed to prove, for example, conservation of angular momentum for rigid bodies.

For charges moving in the same direction, this says that they obey the weak form of Newton's Third Law but not the strong form. The forces are equal and opposite, but they do not point along the direction from one charge to the other. (Note that the satisfying the strong form is actually not even possible in a relativistic theory! To identify the vector connecting the charges, you need to specify the locations of the two particles, which have a spacelike separation, at the same instant in time. Since different observers disagree about simultaneity of separated events, it is impossible to enforce the strong form in a relativistically invariant fashion.)

The second part says that, for charges in more general motion, even the weak form of Newton's Third Law fails. Specifically, it talks about two charges moving in perpendicular direction in a plane. When charge $A$ is located directly ahead of charge $B$, $B$ will feel a magnetic force, but $A$ will not.

The failure of Newton's Third Law seems to indicate that momentum will not be conserved. And, indeed, the total momentum of a group of charges in motion is not conserved. To salvage the conservation law, you need to also include the momentum of the electromagnetic field. The same argument applies to angular momentum; when the strong form of Newton's Third Law fails, only the angular momentum of the charges plus the angular momentum of the field is conserved. These are general properties of theories with continuous dynamical fields; the conservation laws generalize fully, but Newton's Third Law typically does not.

$\endgroup$

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