Talk:Abraham–Lorentz force

message: This article relies heavily on Griffith's discussion, but he has a footnote to an article (Rohrlich's, in American Journal of Physics) which discusses Yaghjian's solution.  He has an entire book on it, Relativistic Dynamics of a Charged Sphere: Updating the Lorentz-Abraham Model, which explains this as an implicit adiabatic assumption in the Abraham-Lorentz-Dirac generalization of this equation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.110.229.62 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 28 March 2007
The "Abraham" in Abraham-Lorentz stands for Max Abraham, a German Physicist who is linked in the See Also section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.204.178.86 (talk • contribs) 06:03, 28 November 2007
Maybe it should be emphasized that that`s only a model, and how that should be useful for calculating the trajectory of a particle in the ordinary sense. Of course, this is still on open problem... but I also smell some self-citation. Is this ok?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.107.92.37 (talk) 13:46, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV?

message: A very good idea. The Abraham-Lorentz-Dirac article should be merged into this one. Spancek (talk) 12:31, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging with the Abraham-Lorentz-Dirac force

message: The Abraham–Lorentz-Dirac force result from a non-rigorous heuristic treatment of the problem, and the cures proposed to deal with the problems are also rather ad-hoc in nature. However, there does exist a recent rigorous derivation of the self-force, see here. I therefore suggest creating a new article based in this treatment, making that the prominent Wiki-article for the self-force, while demoting this article as describing the historical approach to the problem. Count Iblis (talk) 16:23, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rigorous derivation of electromagnetic self-force 

message: Nature is causal. Doesn't a a causal solution also exist, if you integrate form a starting point to current time?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_differential_equation
You get a "low pass filter of first order" type of behaviour, and inserted into the Larmor formula for radiation, the damping becomes 40 decibels per decade.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tapio Angervuori (talk • contribs) 11:41, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Causality? 

message: The last step in the derivation basically follows F=a' from F*v=a'*v. However this is not a unique solution, since an arbitrary number of vectors has this projection on v. The derivation appears to assume that F is parallel to a' here, without stating any reason why this should be the case.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.134.208.16 (talk) 17:04, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Derivation problematic 

message: The article should at least mention that this also works when photons are absorbed. The article talks about the jerk effect when the particle emits a photon. The article should mention the jerk effect when the particle absorbs a photon. 72.25.65.198 (talk) 20:28, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of reverse effect 

message: Article should mention that particles don't suddenly emit photons out of the blue. Photons are emitted when something decelerates it. 72.25.65.156 (talk) 15:59, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cause 

message: Is it worthwhile to include a discussion of the Landau-Lifshitz approximation to Abraham-Lorentzhttp://aapt.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1119/1.3269900?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dustiestgolf (talk • contribs) 17:32, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Landau-Lifshitz

message: This page needs a real history section.  What were the contributions of Max Abraham and Hendrik Lorentz?   
This would also clarify the discussion below on this page of the derivation.  Yes, classically the derivation would make much more sense as simply the Larmor power divided by the velocity, in the opposite direction of the velocity.   But, of course, that was not the problem at hand in 1900.  The question was of explaining atoms in a pre-quantum era, which were assumed to be in SHM, and after that it seems the debate of the force actually depending on the jerk has been relegated to physics teaching journals.  Afterall in relativity and quantum mechanics forces are largely irrelevant.  Energy and momentum are more fundamental.  Moreover, a history section would also shine light on the last absolutely correct point that light carries away momentum, so in the most fundamental sense it does not really violate Newton's 3rd law any more than rockets do.    — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwkeohane (talk • contribs) 18:52, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: This page needs a History Section

message: Hi, everybody. A derivation of limit cycle oscillations has been achieved from purely classical Maxwell’s electrodynamics and published recently in a high impact factor journal (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-020-05928-5). I am the author of the paper, and therefore I am not the person allowed to upload the reference, since a COI is at stake. But perhaps, if  somebody finds it interesting, he could help to revive interest in radiation reaction by introducing a brief paragraph in the section entitled “Self-interactions”. Something similar to this:
::Charged extended particles can experience self-oscillatory dynamics as a result of classical electrodynamic self-interactions \cite{}. This trembling motion has a frequency that is closely related to the zitterbewegung frequency appearing in Dirac's equation. The mechanism producing these fluctuations relies on radiation reaction as appearing in the Abraham-Lorentz force, and arises because some parts of an accelerated charged corpuscle emit electromagnetic perturbations that can affect another part of the body, producing self-forces. Using the Liénard-Wiechert potential as solutions to Maxwell's equations with sources, it can be shown that these forces can be described in terms of state-dependent delay differential equations, which display limit cycle behavior. Alvaro12Lopez (talk) 08:03, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest you wait until the paper has been cited by a lot of other people. Xxanthippe (talk) 08:06, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Self-interactions