sci.physics.particle

On Mar 11, 5:03=A0am, "Y.Porat" wrote:
> On Mar 10, 7:07=A0pm, Igor wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 7, 10:23=A0pm, Tom Roberts wrote:
>
> > > Igor wrote:
> > > > EM fields don't obey the equivalence principle in general, since
> > > > accleration due to an EM field is inversely dependent on test partic=
le
> > > > mass.
>
> > > Hmmm. The equivalence principle is about gravity, not EM. A direct
> > > consequence of it is that _LOCAL_ MEASUREMENTS of EM phenomena in a
> > > gravitational field should agree with similar MEASUREMENTS in an
> > > isolated accelerating system. That is the subject of the query in this=

> > > thread, and is completely independent of how EM fields themselves happ=
en
> > > to accelerate objects.
>
> > > As I already pointed out, the equivalence principle is not violated. P=
MB
> > > gave a reference that discusses this in more detail.
>
> > > Tom Roberts
>
> > But that was my whole point. =A0Gravitational fields should not cause
> > charges to radiate at all. =A0How can a charged particle undergoing
> > geodesic motion radiate if not all observers agree that it is
> > accelerating?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> ------------------
> lets first know the facts:

That never stopped you previously. So why start now?