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...