Do Lorentz Forces Really Violate Newton's 3rd Law?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on whether Lorentz forces violate Newton's 3rd law of motion. In a scenario with magnets and a current-carrying wire, the upward force on the wire suggests a reaction force on the magnets. It is clarified that the interaction involves three components: the magnet, the wire, and the magnetic field, with the field mediating the interaction. Nonrelativistically, the magnet experiences an opposite force, while relativistically, impulses are exchanged between the wire and the field, with momentum transferred to the field. Ultimately, the missing momentum from the system is accounted for by the field itself.
F-Z
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
In classical Lorentz force demonstration, let's say we have 2 permanent magnets generating a magnetic field perpendicular, out from the page and a wire carrying current to the left. Thus we would expect that the Lorentz Force will exert an upward force on the wire.

According to Newton's 3rd law, there should be a reaction to this force. So do the magnets actually being pushed down? Or is there something else to compensate for the momentum?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There are three objects: the magnet, the wire, and the field. The field mediates the interaction. Nonrelativistically, you can just consider the action reaction at a distance, so the magnet would be pushed with an opposite force. Relativistically, if the wire expreriences an impulse from the field, then the field experiences an opposite impulse from the wire. This impulse is transferred at the speed c to the magnet. If what you meant by "classically" was "nonrelativistically," then you are talking action-at-a-distance, and Newton's third law treats the two objects, magnet and wire, as interacting directly at a distance.
 
Susskind (in The Theoretical Minimum, volume 1, pages 203-205) writes the Lagrangian for the magnetic field as ##L=\frac m 2(\dot x^2+\dot y^2 + \dot z^2)+ \frac e c (\dot x A_x +\dot y A_y +\dot z A_z)## and then calculates ##\dot p_x =ma_x + \frac e c \frac d {dt} A_x=ma_x + \frac e c(\frac {\partial A_x} {\partial x}\dot x + \frac {\partial A_x} {\partial y}\dot y + \frac {\partial A_x} {\partial z}\dot z)##. I have problems with the last step. I might have written ##\frac {dA_x} {dt}...
Thread 'Griffith, Electrodynamics, 4th Edition, Example 4.8. (Second part)'
I am reading the Griffith, Electrodynamics book, 4th edition, Example 4.8. I want to understand some issues more correctly. It's a little bit difficult to understand now. > Example 4.8. Suppose the entire region below the plane ##z=0## in Fig. 4.28 is filled with uniform linear dielectric material of susceptibility ##\chi_e##. Calculate the force on a point charge ##q## situated a distance ##d## above the origin. In the page 196, in the first paragraph, the author argues as follows ...

Similar threads

Back
Top