Open Daily: 10am - 10pm | Alley door pickup 10am - 7pm 3038 Hennepin Ave Minneapolis, MN
612-822-4611

  • Open Daily: 10am - 10pm
    Alley-side Pickup: 10am - 7pm

    3038 Hennepin Ave Minneapolis, MN
    612-822-4611

Open Daily: 10am - 10pm | Alley-side Pickup: 10am - 7pm
3038 Hennepin Ave Minneapolis, MN
612-822-4611
Uniformly Accelerating Charged Particles: A Threat to the Equivalence Principle

Uniformly Accelerating Charged Particles: A Threat to the Equivalence Principle

Lyle, Stephen

Hardcover

Series: Fundamental Theories of Physics, Book 158

Physics

ISBN10: 3540684697
ISBN13: 9783540684695
Publisher: Springer
Published: Jul 10 2008
Pages: 361
Weight: 1.45
Height: 0.70 Width: 6.40 Depth: 9.40
Language: English
Back in1954, a paper[2] by Bondi and Gold was to pick upona much olderqu- tion and raise anew one that would trigger another longdebate. The old question hadbeenaroundsince the beginning of the twentiethcentury, whenBorn?rstraised it[1] and others followed suit. This was the question of whethera uniformly acc- erated charge (in?at spacetime) would radiateelectromagnetic energy. The new question arose from the claim by Bondi and Gold that (inthe contextof general relativity now)a static charge ina static gravitational ?eld cannot radiateenergy. If this were the case, thenaparticular version of the equivalence principle would thereby be contradicted. This book reviews the problem discovered by Bondi and Gold and discusses the ensuingdebate ascarried on by Fulton and Rohrlich [3], DeWitt and Brehme [4], Mould [5], Boulware [6], andParrott [7].Various solutionshave been proposed by the above (and otherswhoare not discussed here). One of the aims here will be to putforward arather different solution to Bondi and Gold's radiation problem. So eventhough the paperscited are discussed to a large extent in chronological order, the reason for writing this is not justto produce an historical reference. Andeven though the version of general relativity applied hereis entirely consensual, every one of these papersis criticised on at leastoneimportant count, soI suspectthat the resultas a whole should not be described asconsensual.

1 different editions

Also available

Also from

Lyle, Stephen

View All

Also in

Physics

View All