Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!gwyn From: gwyn@brl-tgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn) Newsgroups: net.astro,net.physics Subject: Re: Equivalence Principle and Electric Charge Message-ID: <6475@brl-tgr.ARPA> Date: Sat, 8-Dec-84 00:24:47 EST Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.6475 Posted: Sat Dec 8 00:24:47 1984 Date-Received: Sun, 9-Dec-84 03:18:44 EST References: <1534@pur-phy.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: Ballistic Research Lab Lines: 11 Xref: watmath net.astro:374 net.physics:1978 > ... Suppose that I were to take an electrical charge ..., put a force on > it and accelerated it. It would then radiate electromagnetic waves. Now > suppose that I were to place this charge on a table in my office. The > charge is in a gravitational field ... However, this charge does not > radiate, even though it is in a situation which is equivalent to an > acceleration. I think it would, if you were in free-fall. Similarly, if you had been attached to the charge's rest frame in the first example, I don't think it would appear to radiate. However, it has been a long time since I was up on this stuff...