Re: Contradictions?

On Nov 6, 11:49 pm, Dono <sa...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 6, 8:23 pm, RP <no_mail_no_s...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



harry wrote:

You speak of "force" on a "very long" wire, and the force laws refer to the
moving charges. Now, the charge density of the "moving" wire is perceived to
be greater than that of the "stationary" wire, also by the factor gamma.
Thus we have in the zone of interest (gamma=2 so that F=2F'):

F'F'F'F'F'F'F'F'F'F'
- - - - - - - - - -    --> v
 _   _   _   _   _
 F   F   F   F   F

In words: the force per "moving" ion appears to be less by factor gamma but
the force between the wires is still in equilibrium.

Regards,
Harald

======

The force on the wire is the vector sum of the forces on its  ions.
------

Here are the facts: With the origins of K and K' centered on two
identical,  uniformly charged, parallel
relatively moving wires respectively, when y and y' align, then the
forces
on the wires must be equal and opposite, owing to momentum
conservation, and we must have F'=F , owing to the symmetry wrt K and
K',

But if we add a third wire with the origin of K'' centered on it, and
this wire is at rest wrt K with y and y'' aligned, then the force
between
these two wires at rest in K will transform, according to special
retativity, as
F'=F/gamma.

Thus if all three wires are arranged on the same plane in the order
K''->K->K', and if in K the mutual forces between any two adjacent
wires is F, then the opposing forces on the center wire cancel out.
The center wire has no net transverse force acting on it. But when we
transform to K' there is now a net transverse force on the center
wire. The opposing forces are now F/gamma and F, which do not cancel.
This poses a contradiction in the form of a CP violation, violtion of
momentum  conservation, and possibly other violations, unless of
course gamma=1, in which case
there is no
contradiction. This is however eqivalent to the satement that all
forces are constant through transformations between frames of
reference, and/or the statement that the
Lorentz transform is equivalent to the Galilean transform.

You didn't understand a word of what I explained to you , old fart.
You still don't understand how ELECTROSTATIC (Coulomb) forces turn
into Lorentz forces when the wires move wrt each other.

No... Motion is not the operative process.
Superpositon of the the Coulomb fields is the
actual process and motion may or may not
be incidental to the resultant force.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_integral#Some_practical_applications

http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/www/802TEAL3D/visualizations/magnetostatics/index.htm

Sue...


You are such a
stubborn imbecile, Richard Perry. And the passage of years has made
you into a bigger imbecile.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Contradictions?
    ... moving charges. ... the charge density of the "moving" wire is perceived ... be greater than that of the "stationary" wire, ... Lorentz transform is equivalent to the Galilean transform. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Contradictions?
    ... moving charges. ... the charge density of the "moving" wire is perceived to ... be greater than that of the "stationary" wire, ... these two wires at rest in K will transform, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Contradictions?
    ... moving charges. ... the charge density of the "moving" wire is perceived to ... be greater than that of the "stationary" wire, ... Lorentz transform is equivalent to the Galilean transform. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Contradictions?
    ... moving charges. ... the charge density of the "moving" wire is perceived to ... be greater than that of the "stationary" wire, ... Lorentz transform is equivalent to the Galilean transform. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Contradictions?
    ... moving charges. ... the charge density of the "moving" wire is perceived to ... be greater than that of the "stationary" wire, ... these two wires at rest in K will transform, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)