Illustrated Physics
physics, drawn
Concept

Acceleration — where it appears

The rate at which a velocity changes, in magnitude or in direction or in both. It is the quantity a force is proportional to and the quantity an observer inside a sealed box cannot distinguish from gravity, and turning at constant speed is as much of it as speeding up in a straight line.

Named by 6 essays across 3 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The shell of news, and the kink inside it. A charge that was moving at 0.6c to the right, stopped over a short interval, and has been at rest ever since. Outside the sphere of radius ct nothing has heard: the field there still points at the position the charge would have reached had it carried on, marked ahead of it. Inside, the field is that of a charge at rest. In between is a shell one deceleration-time thick, and across it the field line has to bend, because a field line cannot simply stop in empty space — the two ends are joined here to 8.5e-14 pixels. That bend is transverse to the radius, and it is the radiation. It is not an extra thing the charge emitted; it is the join between two static fields that do not line up, and it travels outward at c because that is where the news front is.

The field that points where the charge is now

The field here was set by what the charge was doing a distance over c ago, so it ought to point at where the charge used to be. For a charge moving steadily it points at where the charge is — not approximately, exactly — and nothing has outrun light. What breaks the arrangement is a change of motion, and the break is the whole of radiation.

electromagnetism · Retardation Two rockets that keep their distance, and the string that does not. Two rockets 0.5 unit apart in the laboratory, given identical acceleration programmes there, drawn in units where the light speed is one and c²/a is one. Their laboratory separation is constant for ever — the two worldlines are the same curve shifted sideways, and every horizontal line meets them 0.5 apart. The slanted lines are the rockets' own lines of simultaneity, and the distance between the worldlines measured along those is what a string tied between them has to span: at 0.3c it is 0.512, a stretch of 2 per cent; at 0.6c it is 0.557, a stretch of 11 per cent; at 0.8c it is 0.631, a stretch of 26 per cent; at 0.9c it is 0.710, a stretch of 42 per cent. The γL that is always quoted — 0.524, 0.625, 0.833, 1.147 here — is the limit of that measurement for a vanishing gap, and at a gap of 0.5 in these units it overstates the stretch by up to 38.1 per cent; shrinking the gap a hundredfold brings the two within 0.46 per cent. Either way the string is stretched and breaks, while the gap in the laboratory never changes by a millimetre. Length contraction is not something that happens to a rod. It is a statement about which events count as simultaneous, and a rod that is not allowed to contract is a rod that is being pulled apart.

The string that breaks between two rockets

Two rockets a metre apart, given identical acceleration programmes, stay a metre apart in the laboratory for ever. A string tied between them breaks anyway. Nothing pulls on it, nothing in the laboratory moves relative to anything else, and the string is stretched — because the distance it has to span is measured on the rockets' slices of simultaneity and not on the laboratory's.

relativity · Length contraction The self-force matters at 6.27 × 10⁻²⁴ s, and nowhere a charge has ever been. The ratio of the radiation reaction to the applied force, which is τ divided by the time the force takes to change, on a logarithmic axis. τ = μ₀q²/6πmc = 6.266e-24 s for an electron, and light crosses 1.879 femtometres in that time — two thirds of the classical electron radius. a 3 GHz accelerating cavity: 1.9e-14; a 500 nm optical field: 3.8e-9; an electron orbiting a proton, ground state: 4.1e-8; an X-ray at 0.1 nm: 1.9e-5; over a classical electron radius: 6.7e-1. The largest of them, "over a classical electron radius", is still 1.5e+0 times too slow. So the correction is never large for any force anybody can apply, and the only regime where it would be is one in which the charge's own structure has already made the whole description meaningless.

The force a charge exerts on itself

Larmor's formula says how much an accelerating charge radiates and says nothing about who pays. Conservation says the charge does, so there is a force on it — and the equation that force produces has a free particle accelerating for ever with nothing pushing it, or else beginning to move before it is pushed. Both solutions are absurd, and the interval over which they are absurd is smaller than the electron the equation was written for.

astrophysics · Radiating charge A circumference that is more than 2π times the radius. The ratio of a rotating disc's measured circumference to 2π times its measured radius, against the speed of the rim, together with the rate of a clock carried on the rim. Rulers laid round the rim lie along their own direction of motion and are contracted; rulers laid along a radius lie across it and are not. So the circumference takes more of them than a stationary observer counts and the radius takes the same number, and the ratio is γ: 1.091 at β = 0.4, 1.400 at β = 0.7, 2.294 at β = 0.9. The geometry a rotating observer measures is therefore not Euclidean, and it is not Euclidean by an amount that depends on where on the disc the measurement is made. That is the observation Einstein said set him on the road to describing gravity with curved geometry: here is an accelerated frame, and here is a geometry in it that no choice of Cartesian coordinates can flatten. The rim's clock runs slow by the same factor, so a rotating frame has neither a common time nor a flat space.

The disc that cannot be spun

Set a disc turning and measure its circumference with rulers carried on the rim. They lie along their own direction of motion and are contracted, so more of them fit; rulers along a radius lie across the motion and are not. The ratio of circumference to radius is therefore not two pi, in a frame where nothing is happening but rotation — and Einstein said that was what set him looking for gravity in geometry.

relativity · Length contraction The turnaround, made gentler and gentler, and the difference that does not move. A round trip to a star 4 light-years away at 0.6c, with the turnaround done at nine different accelerations from a tenth of a gravity to a thousand. The upper curve is the age difference between the twins and the lower one is how much of that difference the turnaround itself contributes. At 0.1 g the turn accounts for 51 per cent of it; at 1000 g it accounts for 0.00 per cent, and it keeps falling. The total does not follow it down: it tends to 2.67 years, which is what the instantaneous-turnaround cartoon gives. So the acceleration is not what makes the twins differ. It is what makes one twin's path the bent one, and a bent path through spacetime is shorter for the same reason a bent path on a map is longer — but the amount is in the legs, not in the corner, and the corner's contribution can be made as small as anyone likes without the difference going away.

The clock that does not feel the turn

Proper time is the integral of dt over gamma, which presumes that a clock's rate depends on its speed and on nothing else — not on its acceleration, not on how long it has been accelerating. That is an assumption about clocks rather than a theorem about spacetime, and the twin result is empty without it.

relativity · Accelerated frames The power at stake, which is none. The power an electron radiates by Larmor's formula, against its acceleration, with 5 cases marked. a charge on a table: 9.8e+0 m/s², 5.49e-52 W; a laboratory centrifuge: 1.0e+6 m/s², 5.71e-42 W; a proton at the LHC: 1.9e+16 m/s², 2.06e-21 W; an electron in a linac: 2.0e+19 m/s², 2.28e-15 W; an electron in a hydrogen atom: 9.0e+22 m/s², 4.62e-8 W. The slope is two, measured on the drawn line. A charge held at one gravity radiates 5.49e-52 watts, which over the whole age of the universe comes to 2.39e-34 joules — far less than one photon of any kind. So the question of whether it radiates is not an experimental question about a charge on a table, and never has been. Every number here is a straight line on logarithmic axes with an exponent the figure measures.

Whether a charge on a table glows

The equivalence principle says a charge at rest in a gravitational field is a charge accelerating in empty space, and an accelerating charge radiates. Nothing is supplying the energy. The argument has run for eighty years, and its resolution is that radiation is not something a single observer can define.

astrophysics · Radiating charge

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Larmor formulaRadiationCausalityEquivalence principleLength contractionProper lengthProper timeReference framesSimultaneityTime dilationUnruh effectWorldline

All concepts