0

I asked a similar question but it was closed with no valid reason, this question asks a surely legit question of what happens when a charge moves at $c-\epsilon$.

Consider an electron that actually spins at c-1 planck's L. I imagine that even such a little difference means a lot, but even so, can you tell me what happens? I read some articles that justify all electrons properties just by it spinnin at c: they mention auto induction, magnetic pressure (?) that compensates charge repulsion, resonant frequency of LC circuit etc...

[Note: do you know why the actual spinning of the electron has been discarded and a meaningless 'intrinsic' property has been accepted? I know little of the mentioned processes an formulas, but one thing strikes me as plain and obvious, if the charge spins at near c the magnetic attraction almos compensate the repulsion, and the residual force explains the perfect spherical shape. Also, using the classical values, the magnitude of the spin is short by a factor smaller than 10 and a spin at 0.995 c already produces an angular momentum 10 times greater.]

Can you please focus on (auto-) induction if it exists, or on what could cause a boost of the original energy?

edit

since it has been considered a duplicate: isn't there a great difference between speed at near c or at c, in the consequences a charge would experience when it can be affected byits own electrostatic force?

Community
  • 1
  • Your previous question currently has 4 reopen votes and is likely to be reopened imminently. To the extent that it means anything, this question appears to be just asking why electrons don't spin in the same way that a macroscopic object does. – John Rennie Aug 30 '16 at 07:18
  • @JohnRennie, no, not at all, those where incidental remarks [yet, it would be interesting to know why the actual spin has been discarded, since there is not one instance of anything in the universe that is not spinning.] I hope you reconsider your downvote, because this question asks to examin what phenomena arise if a charge spins at near-c. The question is also a lot different from the previous, since, as you are surely aware, a lot changes then the barrier of c is actually reached. –  Aug 30 '16 at 07:25
  • @JohnRennie, just to make response more explicit, do you think that spinning/moving at near-c and actually at c makes no difference at all? Because, ifyou do, I'll delete this question (hoping that the previous is really reopened). But, don't you think people are more confident to answer this rather than that uncharterd-water-question? –  Aug 30 '16 at 07:39
  • 1
    A really interesting question. Until now I was not thinking about how fast an electrons intrinsic spin is and will it changes under the influence of somewhat. After realising the implications I think that an electron is spinning only as long as the electrons magnetic dipole moment gets aligned. Than heavier the alignment than faster the spin. This is not the answer to your question but perhaps an important remark. – HolgerFiedler Aug 30 '16 at 07:48
  • The electron is an excitation in a quantum field - it is not a little ball and does not spin like one. To attempt to understand the properties of any fundamental particle in macroscopic terms is futile as everyday concepts simply don't apply. So your question is based upon a misconception. – John Rennie Aug 30 '16 at 07:53
  • 1
    @JohnRennie In some situations electrons are spinning. The Einstein-de Haas-experiment is a strong evidence for this. – HolgerFiedler Aug 30 '16 at 08:00
  • And just to prove I am not entirely malicious I have just managed to get your previous question reopened. mainly I have to admit because I'm very curious to know what the answer is. – John Rennie Aug 30 '16 at 08:03
  • @HolgerFiedler: note the last paragraph of the article you cite: Calculations based on a model of electron spin as a circulating electric charge underestimate this magnetic moment by a factor of approximately 2, the Landé g-factor. A correct description of this magnetic moment requires a treatment based on quantum electrodynamics. – John Rennie Aug 30 '16 at 08:05
  • To reopen this question (v2) consider to make more precise what is meant with the title phrase "a charge spins at near $c$", cf. http://physics.stackexchange.com/q/1/2451 , http://physics.stackexchange.com/q/822/2451 and links therein. – Qmechanic Aug 30 '16 at 08:19
  • @JohnRennie, you are surely never malicious, but answer my question: if Nature has forbidden c but allows c-1 to electrons isn't it because the tiny difference has huge consequences? do you really think that spinning at c or near c makes little or no difference? –  Aug 30 '16 at 09:12
  • @Qmechanic, I have been extremely precise in the body of the question specifying that the "near c" in the title means c minus one planck's length, which is permitted by current laws of physics. How can I be more precise? Do you, too, think that c-1 and c makes little or no difference? –  Aug 30 '16 at 09:15
  • @JohnRennie, "...The electron is an excitation in a quantum field - it is not a little ball and does not spin* like one....". Are you saying that it's a point particle (or just an excitation*) and therefore it can't spin? Do you realize how incorrect that is, and that in a field of 1 T it does spin at 10 billion of rps? –  Aug 30 '16 at 10:14
  • @user104372: can't spin on its own axis. – John Rennie Aug 30 '16 at 11:30
  • @JohnRennie, if you can't explain that in a comment I'll ask a separate question about it. It would be best if you had second thoughts on this question too, voted to reopen, and posted a nice answer examining all issues- –  Aug 30 '16 at 14:33
  • @JohnRennie, I have asked a new question, I hope you are willing to explain your statements –  Aug 31 '16 at 07:02

0 Answers0