Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: point particles



Quoting Bob Sciamanda <trebor@VELOCITY.NET>:

J Denker's specification of the CM as the assumed origin for the
"physics" dipole moment is news to me. In my experience no mention of the
CM occurs in any textbook definition of the physics electrical dipole
moment. John, would you give a reference for this distinction between a
"mathematical" vs "physics" dipole moment?

It was news to me, too! I know of no reference that openly
discusses the subject. I made it up this morning, the
distinction and the terminology. But I think it's right.
Ludwik kept asking the question, and kept getting conflicting
answers. There was only one way I could see to resolve the
conflict.

If I had it to do over again, I might call one of them just
the "first moment" of the charge distribution, and call the
other one the "electro/inertial" dipole moment.

Bob then partially answered his own question:

Look at:
http://physicsweb.org/article/news/6/2/13

These experiments are seeking to measure the dipole moment of the electron
relative to its CM.

So at least *some* people are calling the electro/inertial
dipole moment "the" electric dipole moment.

This is an instance where people in a specific specialty usurp established
terminology and customize it as if it applies to only their specialized
application.
Well established textbook definitions should be respected by researchers.
Let us not compound the students' sources of confusion.

I agree in principle ... but the electro/inertial version is
perhaps more widely established and more respectable than you
might suspect. The fact that CODATA reports a numerical value
for "the" electric dipole moment of the proton lends a fair bit
of respectability; see pages 951/952 of
http://www.motionmountain.net/CC-PARTS.pdf

Also note that in the usual introductory cases (i.e. objects
with zero net charge) the fancy definition is equivalent to
the prosaic definition, so I see no urgent need to deprecate
the fancy definition.