Does a free falling charged ball emit radiation?

[John Ye]

18 minutes ago, swansont said:

Yes.

What is the force causing the acceleration that makes it slow down?

Specifically, the acceleration.  

Your assertion is that the negative acceleration causes the radiation, correct? What is the external interaction that is giving you this acceleration?

We agree that you have said this. Again and again; assertion without justification. But you are wrong — it will radiate. I gave a link to the physics some time ago.

Electrons in linear accelerator don't radiate, electrons in cyclotron do.

This is a solid fact.

[swansont]

7 minutes ago, John Ye said:

Electrons in linear accelerator don't radiate, electrons in cyclotron do.

This is a solid fact.

So solid you can't actually point to any evidence for it, or any mainstream physics that would back it up. 

Nor have you been able to back up your claim that only deceleration gives radiation, or why circular motion gives radiation, when no decelerating force exists.

All you've given us is assertion, and you have had ample chance to provide evidence, or some actual physics to ponder. But...nothing.

One more chance to provide evidence or some physics.

[John Ye]

32 minutes ago, swansont said:

Your assertion is that the negative acceleration causes the radiation, correct? What is the external interaction that is giving you this acceleration?

The interaction is electron with magnetic flux line, which makes electron be deflected, and lose energy.

If no additional energy is given, the electron will finally stop circling.

In any term, we say that electron has a minus acceleration value.

6 minutes ago, swansont said:

So solid you can't actually point to any evidence for it, or any mainstream physics that would back it up. 

Nor have you been able to back up your claim that only deceleration gives radiation, or why circular motion gives radiation, when no decelerating force exists.

All you've given us is assertion, and you have had ample chance to provide evidence, or some actual physics to ponder. But...nothing.

One more chance to provide evidence or some physics.

My assertion is not the same as those in main stream textbook. If the same, we are not necessary to discuss the topic here.

Go back to the simplest case, you said radiation, I said no. I give linear accelerator as evidence. I think you had better to give experimental evidence, not what main stream textbook says.

[Ghideon]

22 hours ago, John Ye said:

If car  crashes to the tree while  driver is still stepping on accelerator pedal, the car has two forces on it. One is engine force, the other is tree's reaction force.

The result is a bad car and hurting driver.

Combined velocity is very very big, of course a minus value.

Thanks for the analogy! I have a followup, sorry if I'm repetitive but I don't get the connection to the case with the electron. 

In the case with radiation from charges you state that acceleration and slowing down has a different outcome?  In the car analogy, does that mean that a car hit by a moving object will suffer a different outcome than a moving* car hitting a standstill object? To continue your analogy: Two cars collide. I thougt the result depends on the relative motion of the two cars, not how one or both move relative to the road. Or, according to you, does it matter which one of the cars that accelerates at the time of impact?

*) Just to state the obvious: I use the road as a frame of reference. The observer of the crash is not moving along the road.

[swansont]

1 hour ago, John Ye said:

The interaction is electron with magnetic flux line, which makes electron be deflected, and lose energy.

The magnetic force is perpendicular to the velocity, and therefore does no work. The loss of energy comes from something else (hint: it's the radiation, caused by the acceleration)

1 hour ago, John Ye said:

If no additional energy is given, the electron will finally stop circling.

In any term, we say that electron has a minus acceleration value.

IOW you can't answer the question.

1 hour ago, John Ye said:

My assertion is not the same as those in main stream textbook. If the same, we are not necessary to discuss the topic here.

And assertions require evidence, or some kind of model, for us to discuss them.

1 hour ago, John Ye said:

Go back to the simplest case, you said radiation, I said no. I give linear accelerator as evidence. I think you had better to give experimental evidence, not what main stream textbook says.

It's your assertion. You are the one who needs to back it up. Since you persistently have not, we're done here.