This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Length contraction article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2Auto-archiving period: 90 days
![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
|
The wheel picture should be a rather different (probably an egg-like) shape. The centre of curvature of the (stationary) base should be at the height of the original centre (= half way to the top), and the wheel should be getting narrower with increaing height at this half way point.
(Special relativity actually shows this to be an oversimplification, as the wheel would be bent out-of plane). PhysicistQuery ( talk) 17:48, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Magnetic forces are caused by relativistic contraction when electrons are moving relative to atomic nuclei. The magnetic force on a moving charge next to a current-carrying wire is a result of relativistic motion between electrons and protons.
This is utter rubbish! It implies that an electron outside and stationary to the wire would be repelled because in that case the electrons would be contracted.
Hilariously enough, this concept is due to the relative velocity inside the wire of electrons to the nuclei, because their relative motion is what generates the changing E fields in the wire and along its direction, thus inducing the curl B. (Displacement current).
The Feynman citation and the other (assuming its based on the same thing) ought to be flushed ASAP! Byron Forbes ( talk) 05:44, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
In 1820, André-Marie Ampère showed that parallel wires having currents in the same direction attract one another. In the electrons' frame of reference, the moving wire contracts slightly, causing the protons of the opposite wire to be locally denser. As the electrons in the opposite wire are moving as well, they do not contract (as much). This results in an apparent local imbalance between electrons and protons; the moving electrons in one wire are attracted to the extra protons in the other. The reverse can also be considered. To the static proton's frame of reference, the electrons are moving and contracted, resulting in the same imbalance. The electron drift velocity is relatively very slow, on the order of a meter an hour but the force between an electron and proton is so enormous that even at this very slow speed the relativistic contraction causes significant effects.
LOL. Really? How about, above and below the wires we have B fields attracting each other. Do we really need to stink up everything with Relativity? — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures| Byron Forbes ( talk) 07:15, 23 May 2023 (UTC)]] comment added by [[User:Hosh1313| Byron Forbes ( talk) 07:15, 23 May 2023 (UTC)]] ( talk • contribs) 05:50, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
link)
{{
cite web}}
: External link in |website=
(
help)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Length contraction article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2Auto-archiving period: 90 days
![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
|
The wheel picture should be a rather different (probably an egg-like) shape. The centre of curvature of the (stationary) base should be at the height of the original centre (= half way to the top), and the wheel should be getting narrower with increaing height at this half way point.
(Special relativity actually shows this to be an oversimplification, as the wheel would be bent out-of plane). PhysicistQuery ( talk) 17:48, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Magnetic forces are caused by relativistic contraction when electrons are moving relative to atomic nuclei. The magnetic force on a moving charge next to a current-carrying wire is a result of relativistic motion between electrons and protons.
This is utter rubbish! It implies that an electron outside and stationary to the wire would be repelled because in that case the electrons would be contracted.
Hilariously enough, this concept is due to the relative velocity inside the wire of electrons to the nuclei, because their relative motion is what generates the changing E fields in the wire and along its direction, thus inducing the curl B. (Displacement current).
The Feynman citation and the other (assuming its based on the same thing) ought to be flushed ASAP! Byron Forbes ( talk) 05:44, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
In 1820, André-Marie Ampère showed that parallel wires having currents in the same direction attract one another. In the electrons' frame of reference, the moving wire contracts slightly, causing the protons of the opposite wire to be locally denser. As the electrons in the opposite wire are moving as well, they do not contract (as much). This results in an apparent local imbalance between electrons and protons; the moving electrons in one wire are attracted to the extra protons in the other. The reverse can also be considered. To the static proton's frame of reference, the electrons are moving and contracted, resulting in the same imbalance. The electron drift velocity is relatively very slow, on the order of a meter an hour but the force between an electron and proton is so enormous that even at this very slow speed the relativistic contraction causes significant effects.
LOL. Really? How about, above and below the wires we have B fields attracting each other. Do we really need to stink up everything with Relativity? — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures| Byron Forbes ( talk) 07:15, 23 May 2023 (UTC)]] comment added by [[User:Hosh1313| Byron Forbes ( talk) 07:15, 23 May 2023 (UTC)]] ( talk • contribs) 05:50, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
link)
{{
cite web}}
: External link in |website=
(
help)