Force felt by a moving charge due to its own magnetic field?












1












$begingroup$


Suppose a moving proton traverses a uniform magnetic field with constant velocity. Note that because the proton is moving, it is generating its own magnetic field.



Is the magnetic force experienced by the proton completely explained by the Lorentz force law, i.e., F = q (v x B)?



Or, is the proton also experiencing an additional magnetic force arising from the interaction of its own magnetic field with the external field? If that is incorrect, is the Lorentz force law actually just describing the result of proton field-external field interactions, such that any and all magnetic force on the proton is explained by the Lorentz force?










share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




M. A. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    A moving proton can’t traverse a uniform magnetic field with uniform velocity, unless the field is parallel or antiparallel to the proton’s direction of motion. Otherwise, there will be a force making it accelerate.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    3 hours ago


















1












$begingroup$


Suppose a moving proton traverses a uniform magnetic field with constant velocity. Note that because the proton is moving, it is generating its own magnetic field.



Is the magnetic force experienced by the proton completely explained by the Lorentz force law, i.e., F = q (v x B)?



Or, is the proton also experiencing an additional magnetic force arising from the interaction of its own magnetic field with the external field? If that is incorrect, is the Lorentz force law actually just describing the result of proton field-external field interactions, such that any and all magnetic force on the proton is explained by the Lorentz force?










share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




M. A. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    A moving proton can’t traverse a uniform magnetic field with uniform velocity, unless the field is parallel or antiparallel to the proton’s direction of motion. Otherwise, there will be a force making it accelerate.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    3 hours ago
















1












1








1





$begingroup$


Suppose a moving proton traverses a uniform magnetic field with constant velocity. Note that because the proton is moving, it is generating its own magnetic field.



Is the magnetic force experienced by the proton completely explained by the Lorentz force law, i.e., F = q (v x B)?



Or, is the proton also experiencing an additional magnetic force arising from the interaction of its own magnetic field with the external field? If that is incorrect, is the Lorentz force law actually just describing the result of proton field-external field interactions, such that any and all magnetic force on the proton is explained by the Lorentz force?










share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




M. A. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




Suppose a moving proton traverses a uniform magnetic field with constant velocity. Note that because the proton is moving, it is generating its own magnetic field.



Is the magnetic force experienced by the proton completely explained by the Lorentz force law, i.e., F = q (v x B)?



Or, is the proton also experiencing an additional magnetic force arising from the interaction of its own magnetic field with the external field? If that is incorrect, is the Lorentz force law actually just describing the result of proton field-external field interactions, such that any and all magnetic force on the proton is explained by the Lorentz force?







electromagnetism magnetic-fields






share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




M. A. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




M. A. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question






New contributor




M. A. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 4 hours ago









M. A.M. A.

111




111




New contributor




M. A. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





M. A. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






M. A. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    A moving proton can’t traverse a uniform magnetic field with uniform velocity, unless the field is parallel or antiparallel to the proton’s direction of motion. Otherwise, there will be a force making it accelerate.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    3 hours ago
















  • 1




    $begingroup$
    A moving proton can’t traverse a uniform magnetic field with uniform velocity, unless the field is parallel or antiparallel to the proton’s direction of motion. Otherwise, there will be a force making it accelerate.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    3 hours ago










1




1




$begingroup$
A moving proton can’t traverse a uniform magnetic field with uniform velocity, unless the field is parallel or antiparallel to the proton’s direction of motion. Otherwise, there will be a force making it accelerate.
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
3 hours ago






$begingroup$
A moving proton can’t traverse a uniform magnetic field with uniform velocity, unless the field is parallel or antiparallel to the proton’s direction of motion. Otherwise, there will be a force making it accelerate.
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
3 hours ago












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















5












$begingroup$

Magnetic fields do not interact with magnetic fields; they simply superpose. Instead, magnetic fields interact with charged particles.



It is reasonable to ask whether a moving charged particle feels its own magnetic field, just as it is reasonable to ask whether a stationary (or moving) charged particle feels its own electric field.



The answer in the case of stationary or uniformly-moving charged particle is that these electric and magnetic self-forces are observed to be zero. For a point particle, its electrical and magnetic fields become infinitely large near the particle, but they can be understood as acting on the particle in a symmetric way such that there is no net force in any direction.



In the case of an accelerating charged particle, things are more complicated. Then the Lorentz force due to external fields is not the whole story. An accelerating charge radiates electromagnetic waves that carry energy, momentum, and angular momentum away to infinity. The energy in these waves must come from the kinetic energy of the particle, so there must be a backreaction force on the particle slowing it down, in order to conserve energy. This backreaction can be understood as the self-force, where the accelerating particle’s own field exerts a nonzero force on it.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    The idea of the diverging electric and magnetic field cancelling out seems too convenient to me. I first saw it when reading the Schwinger book (chapter 1 or 2 I think) but the argument felt rather informal. Is there any formal way to prove it or to work around it?
    $endgroup$
    – Salvador Villarreal
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    I think you can assume a finite radius for the particle, calculate the self-force, and then take the limit as the radius goes to zero.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    50 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot for the response. So, is it fair to say that it is futile to try and understand the magnetic part of the Lorentz force as a result of interacting magnetic field lines somehow "pushing" or exerting a force on a moving charged particle? If I understand correctly, what is happening is the field is interacting directly with the particle, and the particle's own field is of no consequence. I suppose the next step is to learn how this discussion applies to permanent magnets and the forces between them, but that is probably beyond my grasp!
    $endgroup$
    – M. A.
    48 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    If you are referring to the “catapult field” mentioned in your newer question, I consider that a misconception. I don’t think you’ll find the concept of a catapult field in physics textbooks. (Where did you see it?) The only way classical magnetic fields interact is to superpose. For a charge in uniform motion, the self-force has no net effect and superposing it with the external field does not change this. You should think of the charge as directly interacting with the external field, and, if accelerating, also with its own field.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    35 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    For other readers, the newer question I am referring to is physics.stackexchange.com/questions/459691/….
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    34 mins ago











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});






M. A. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f459674%2fforce-felt-by-a-moving-charge-due-to-its-own-magnetic-field%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









5












$begingroup$

Magnetic fields do not interact with magnetic fields; they simply superpose. Instead, magnetic fields interact with charged particles.



It is reasonable to ask whether a moving charged particle feels its own magnetic field, just as it is reasonable to ask whether a stationary (or moving) charged particle feels its own electric field.



The answer in the case of stationary or uniformly-moving charged particle is that these electric and magnetic self-forces are observed to be zero. For a point particle, its electrical and magnetic fields become infinitely large near the particle, but they can be understood as acting on the particle in a symmetric way such that there is no net force in any direction.



In the case of an accelerating charged particle, things are more complicated. Then the Lorentz force due to external fields is not the whole story. An accelerating charge radiates electromagnetic waves that carry energy, momentum, and angular momentum away to infinity. The energy in these waves must come from the kinetic energy of the particle, so there must be a backreaction force on the particle slowing it down, in order to conserve energy. This backreaction can be understood as the self-force, where the accelerating particle’s own field exerts a nonzero force on it.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    The idea of the diverging electric and magnetic field cancelling out seems too convenient to me. I first saw it when reading the Schwinger book (chapter 1 or 2 I think) but the argument felt rather informal. Is there any formal way to prove it or to work around it?
    $endgroup$
    – Salvador Villarreal
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    I think you can assume a finite radius for the particle, calculate the self-force, and then take the limit as the radius goes to zero.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    50 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot for the response. So, is it fair to say that it is futile to try and understand the magnetic part of the Lorentz force as a result of interacting magnetic field lines somehow "pushing" or exerting a force on a moving charged particle? If I understand correctly, what is happening is the field is interacting directly with the particle, and the particle's own field is of no consequence. I suppose the next step is to learn how this discussion applies to permanent magnets and the forces between them, but that is probably beyond my grasp!
    $endgroup$
    – M. A.
    48 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    If you are referring to the “catapult field” mentioned in your newer question, I consider that a misconception. I don’t think you’ll find the concept of a catapult field in physics textbooks. (Where did you see it?) The only way classical magnetic fields interact is to superpose. For a charge in uniform motion, the self-force has no net effect and superposing it with the external field does not change this. You should think of the charge as directly interacting with the external field, and, if accelerating, also with its own field.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    35 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    For other readers, the newer question I am referring to is physics.stackexchange.com/questions/459691/….
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    34 mins ago
















5












$begingroup$

Magnetic fields do not interact with magnetic fields; they simply superpose. Instead, magnetic fields interact with charged particles.



It is reasonable to ask whether a moving charged particle feels its own magnetic field, just as it is reasonable to ask whether a stationary (or moving) charged particle feels its own electric field.



The answer in the case of stationary or uniformly-moving charged particle is that these electric and magnetic self-forces are observed to be zero. For a point particle, its electrical and magnetic fields become infinitely large near the particle, but they can be understood as acting on the particle in a symmetric way such that there is no net force in any direction.



In the case of an accelerating charged particle, things are more complicated. Then the Lorentz force due to external fields is not the whole story. An accelerating charge radiates electromagnetic waves that carry energy, momentum, and angular momentum away to infinity. The energy in these waves must come from the kinetic energy of the particle, so there must be a backreaction force on the particle slowing it down, in order to conserve energy. This backreaction can be understood as the self-force, where the accelerating particle’s own field exerts a nonzero force on it.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    The idea of the diverging electric and magnetic field cancelling out seems too convenient to me. I first saw it when reading the Schwinger book (chapter 1 or 2 I think) but the argument felt rather informal. Is there any formal way to prove it or to work around it?
    $endgroup$
    – Salvador Villarreal
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    I think you can assume a finite radius for the particle, calculate the self-force, and then take the limit as the radius goes to zero.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    50 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot for the response. So, is it fair to say that it is futile to try and understand the magnetic part of the Lorentz force as a result of interacting magnetic field lines somehow "pushing" or exerting a force on a moving charged particle? If I understand correctly, what is happening is the field is interacting directly with the particle, and the particle's own field is of no consequence. I suppose the next step is to learn how this discussion applies to permanent magnets and the forces between them, but that is probably beyond my grasp!
    $endgroup$
    – M. A.
    48 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    If you are referring to the “catapult field” mentioned in your newer question, I consider that a misconception. I don’t think you’ll find the concept of a catapult field in physics textbooks. (Where did you see it?) The only way classical magnetic fields interact is to superpose. For a charge in uniform motion, the self-force has no net effect and superposing it with the external field does not change this. You should think of the charge as directly interacting with the external field, and, if accelerating, also with its own field.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    35 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    For other readers, the newer question I am referring to is physics.stackexchange.com/questions/459691/….
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    34 mins ago














5












5








5





$begingroup$

Magnetic fields do not interact with magnetic fields; they simply superpose. Instead, magnetic fields interact with charged particles.



It is reasonable to ask whether a moving charged particle feels its own magnetic field, just as it is reasonable to ask whether a stationary (or moving) charged particle feels its own electric field.



The answer in the case of stationary or uniformly-moving charged particle is that these electric and magnetic self-forces are observed to be zero. For a point particle, its electrical and magnetic fields become infinitely large near the particle, but they can be understood as acting on the particle in a symmetric way such that there is no net force in any direction.



In the case of an accelerating charged particle, things are more complicated. Then the Lorentz force due to external fields is not the whole story. An accelerating charge radiates electromagnetic waves that carry energy, momentum, and angular momentum away to infinity. The energy in these waves must come from the kinetic energy of the particle, so there must be a backreaction force on the particle slowing it down, in order to conserve energy. This backreaction can be understood as the self-force, where the accelerating particle’s own field exerts a nonzero force on it.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



Magnetic fields do not interact with magnetic fields; they simply superpose. Instead, magnetic fields interact with charged particles.



It is reasonable to ask whether a moving charged particle feels its own magnetic field, just as it is reasonable to ask whether a stationary (or moving) charged particle feels its own electric field.



The answer in the case of stationary or uniformly-moving charged particle is that these electric and magnetic self-forces are observed to be zero. For a point particle, its electrical and magnetic fields become infinitely large near the particle, but they can be understood as acting on the particle in a symmetric way such that there is no net force in any direction.



In the case of an accelerating charged particle, things are more complicated. Then the Lorentz force due to external fields is not the whole story. An accelerating charge radiates electromagnetic waves that carry energy, momentum, and angular momentum away to infinity. The energy in these waves must come from the kinetic energy of the particle, so there must be a backreaction force on the particle slowing it down, in order to conserve energy. This backreaction can be understood as the self-force, where the accelerating particle’s own field exerts a nonzero force on it.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 3 hours ago

























answered 3 hours ago









G. SmithG. Smith

6,79711123




6,79711123












  • $begingroup$
    The idea of the diverging electric and magnetic field cancelling out seems too convenient to me. I first saw it when reading the Schwinger book (chapter 1 or 2 I think) but the argument felt rather informal. Is there any formal way to prove it or to work around it?
    $endgroup$
    – Salvador Villarreal
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    I think you can assume a finite radius for the particle, calculate the self-force, and then take the limit as the radius goes to zero.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    50 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot for the response. So, is it fair to say that it is futile to try and understand the magnetic part of the Lorentz force as a result of interacting magnetic field lines somehow "pushing" or exerting a force on a moving charged particle? If I understand correctly, what is happening is the field is interacting directly with the particle, and the particle's own field is of no consequence. I suppose the next step is to learn how this discussion applies to permanent magnets and the forces between them, but that is probably beyond my grasp!
    $endgroup$
    – M. A.
    48 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    If you are referring to the “catapult field” mentioned in your newer question, I consider that a misconception. I don’t think you’ll find the concept of a catapult field in physics textbooks. (Where did you see it?) The only way classical magnetic fields interact is to superpose. For a charge in uniform motion, the self-force has no net effect and superposing it with the external field does not change this. You should think of the charge as directly interacting with the external field, and, if accelerating, also with its own field.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    35 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    For other readers, the newer question I am referring to is physics.stackexchange.com/questions/459691/….
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    34 mins ago


















  • $begingroup$
    The idea of the diverging electric and magnetic field cancelling out seems too convenient to me. I first saw it when reading the Schwinger book (chapter 1 or 2 I think) but the argument felt rather informal. Is there any formal way to prove it or to work around it?
    $endgroup$
    – Salvador Villarreal
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    I think you can assume a finite radius for the particle, calculate the self-force, and then take the limit as the radius goes to zero.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    50 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot for the response. So, is it fair to say that it is futile to try and understand the magnetic part of the Lorentz force as a result of interacting magnetic field lines somehow "pushing" or exerting a force on a moving charged particle? If I understand correctly, what is happening is the field is interacting directly with the particle, and the particle's own field is of no consequence. I suppose the next step is to learn how this discussion applies to permanent magnets and the forces between them, but that is probably beyond my grasp!
    $endgroup$
    – M. A.
    48 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    If you are referring to the “catapult field” mentioned in your newer question, I consider that a misconception. I don’t think you’ll find the concept of a catapult field in physics textbooks. (Where did you see it?) The only way classical magnetic fields interact is to superpose. For a charge in uniform motion, the self-force has no net effect and superposing it with the external field does not change this. You should think of the charge as directly interacting with the external field, and, if accelerating, also with its own field.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    35 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    For other readers, the newer question I am referring to is physics.stackexchange.com/questions/459691/….
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    34 mins ago
















$begingroup$
The idea of the diverging electric and magnetic field cancelling out seems too convenient to me. I first saw it when reading the Schwinger book (chapter 1 or 2 I think) but the argument felt rather informal. Is there any formal way to prove it or to work around it?
$endgroup$
– Salvador Villarreal
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
The idea of the diverging electric and magnetic field cancelling out seems too convenient to me. I first saw it when reading the Schwinger book (chapter 1 or 2 I think) but the argument felt rather informal. Is there any formal way to prove it or to work around it?
$endgroup$
– Salvador Villarreal
1 hour ago












$begingroup$
I think you can assume a finite radius for the particle, calculate the self-force, and then take the limit as the radius goes to zero.
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
50 mins ago




$begingroup$
I think you can assume a finite radius for the particle, calculate the self-force, and then take the limit as the radius goes to zero.
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
50 mins ago












$begingroup$
Thanks a lot for the response. So, is it fair to say that it is futile to try and understand the magnetic part of the Lorentz force as a result of interacting magnetic field lines somehow "pushing" or exerting a force on a moving charged particle? If I understand correctly, what is happening is the field is interacting directly with the particle, and the particle's own field is of no consequence. I suppose the next step is to learn how this discussion applies to permanent magnets and the forces between them, but that is probably beyond my grasp!
$endgroup$
– M. A.
48 mins ago




$begingroup$
Thanks a lot for the response. So, is it fair to say that it is futile to try and understand the magnetic part of the Lorentz force as a result of interacting magnetic field lines somehow "pushing" or exerting a force on a moving charged particle? If I understand correctly, what is happening is the field is interacting directly with the particle, and the particle's own field is of no consequence. I suppose the next step is to learn how this discussion applies to permanent magnets and the forces between them, but that is probably beyond my grasp!
$endgroup$
– M. A.
48 mins ago












$begingroup$
If you are referring to the “catapult field” mentioned in your newer question, I consider that a misconception. I don’t think you’ll find the concept of a catapult field in physics textbooks. (Where did you see it?) The only way classical magnetic fields interact is to superpose. For a charge in uniform motion, the self-force has no net effect and superposing it with the external field does not change this. You should think of the charge as directly interacting with the external field, and, if accelerating, also with its own field.
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
35 mins ago




$begingroup$
If you are referring to the “catapult field” mentioned in your newer question, I consider that a misconception. I don’t think you’ll find the concept of a catapult field in physics textbooks. (Where did you see it?) The only way classical magnetic fields interact is to superpose. For a charge in uniform motion, the self-force has no net effect and superposing it with the external field does not change this. You should think of the charge as directly interacting with the external field, and, if accelerating, also with its own field.
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
35 mins ago












$begingroup$
For other readers, the newer question I am referring to is physics.stackexchange.com/questions/459691/….
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
34 mins ago




$begingroup$
For other readers, the newer question I am referring to is physics.stackexchange.com/questions/459691/….
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
34 mins ago










M. A. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










draft saved

draft discarded


















M. A. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













M. A. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












M. A. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f459674%2fforce-felt-by-a-moving-charge-due-to-its-own-magnetic-field%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

SQL Server 17 - Attemping to backup to remote NAS but Access is denied

Always On Availability groups resolving state after failover - Remote harden of transaction...

Restoring from pg_dump with foreign key constraints