Reputation
9,381
Top tag
Next privilege 10,000 Rep.
Access moderator tools
Badges
15 41
Newest
 Nice Answer
Impact
~368k people reached

1d
comment Is Planck’s proof of Kirchhoff’s Law of Thermal Emission false; and if it is not false why is it not false?
@StephenJ.Crothers - How do you expect someone to explain why Planck's proof is not false? Like, do you expect someone to restate the first 50 pages of Planck's book in her own words? Or how about this: Take any random uncontroversial work of nonfiction, say this calculus textbook - mooculus.osu.edu/textbook/mooculus.pdf . If I ask you "Why this book not false?", how would you answer that?
2d
comment Is Planck’s proof of Kirchhoff’s Law of Thermal Emission false; and if it is not false why is it not false?
@StephenJ.Crothers - You are mixing up two questions: (A) "Is my recent paper a correct rebuttal of Planck's proof?", and (B) "Why is Planck's proof not false?" You suggest that your question is purely (B), but (B) by itself is unanswerable. It's like pointing at a physics textbook and saying "Why is this textbook not false?" Ask that question and you can only get the non-answer, "Well, because, umm, huh?? What part of it do you think is false?" Anyway, I focused my answer on (A), because (A) is at least answerable, but your comments made it clear that (A) is not part of your question.
2d
comment Is Planck’s proof of Kirchhoff’s Law of Thermal Emission false; and if it is not false why is it not false?
I believe Planck's proof because I never saw any reason to doubt it. And having read the linked paper, I still do not see any reason to doubt it. Additionally, I know that the result is right because I know several airtight proofs from reading modern textbooks, often crediting Planck. Admittedly, it is possible that Planck stated a true result but gave a false proof. But it suggests that is proof is probably by-and-large correct. Considering all these things, that is why I believe Planck's proof is not false. My belief is not an especially strong belief, but there you have it.
2d
comment Why is the Pythagorean Theorem used for error calculation?
@LeonardoCastro - Sorry I was speaking loosely and leaving out steps. Thanks for your comments, I just edited, I hope it's better now.
2d
revised Why is the Pythagorean Theorem used for error calculation?
make the math more technically correct
Feb
9
answered Is Planck’s proof of Kirchhoff’s Law of Thermal Emission false; and if it is not false why is it not false?
Feb
6
comment Selection rule used in singlet/triplet recombination in LEDs
@user5419 - No. Nothing in my answer is based on the assumption that light has zero angular momentum. I also never said light "does not couple", only that it couples very weakly.
Feb
4
answered Why is the Pythagorean Theorem used for error calculation?
Feb
3
answered Doesn't the success of statistical physics seem somewhat unreasonable?
Jan
29
comment How Special Relativity causes magnetism
@ChrisWhite -- For what it's worth, most serious theoretical physicists believe that magnetic monopoles exist in the universe, but that they're very very rare. I don't think it matters for the issue under discussion though.
Jan
29
comment How Special Relativity causes magnetism
I didn't say that electricity and magnetism were "symmetric" in the sense that you're using the term. (Please re-read my answer, I was discussing asymmetry of pedagogical emphasis.) Any 6-year-old can tell them apart. I only said that the relationship between electricity and magnetism is not cause-and-effect: They are equally fundamental parts of physics.
Jan
19
answered Statistical specific heat as energy fluctuation in spin glasses
Jan
2
answered How to express a mechanical force field in the units of electric fields?
Dec
30
comment Translating Electronic Bands back to first Brilluoin Zone
I recently put an explanation and image on wikipedia on this topic: See en.wikipedia.org/w/… and the red+blue graphs on the right.
Dec
29
comment Has there been any experimental verification of Jeremy England's theory of dissipation-driven adaptation?
I don't understand that comment. Surely you know that Carnot's limit applies to all engines, including those that operate extremely far out of equilibrium. Indeed every "thermodynamic limit" proof I've ever seen, whether Carnot or England or Landauer or Landsberg, applies to all systems, not just (quasi)equilibrium systems.
Dec
29
comment Has there been any experimental verification of Jeremy England's theory of dissipation-driven adaptation?
@CuriousOne - The website englandlab.com is not commercial. It is a research group website that happens to use a memorable "com" address.
Dec
29
comment Has there been any experimental verification of Jeremy England's theory of dissipation-driven adaptation?
England's paper, like Carnot's law, is an attempt to draw conclusions directly from the laws of thermodynamics. If by "triviality" you mean "unambiguous consequence of widely-accepted axioms" then both Carnot's law and England's paper are "trivialities"...as is every theorem in mathematics and much else. That's not how most people use the term "triviality" though. Is that what you mean?
Dec
29
answered Has there been any experimental verification of Jeremy England's theory of dissipation-driven adaptation?
Dec
24
answered How Special Relativity causes magnetism
Dec
22
answered Displacment field for linear dielectric