Timeline for Will Coulomb's law be valid always?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 18, 2020 at 9:21 | vote | accept | Vaibhav Pankhala | ||
| Aug 18, 2020 at 9:22 | |||||
| Aug 18, 2020 at 8:13 | comment | added | Thirsty for concepts | Check the chat section. I have sent a message in that which u had given the link for. | |
| Aug 18, 2020 at 7:41 | comment | added | Vaibhav Pankhala | Let us continue this discussion in chat. | |
| Aug 18, 2020 at 7:39 | comment | added | Vaibhav Pankhala | ok now i understood it. | |
| Aug 17, 2020 at 18:38 | comment | added | Thirsty for concepts | Pls ask again and again until you understand it properly. | |
| Aug 17, 2020 at 18:28 | comment | added | Thirsty for concepts | Now I have edited my answer. Hope now you are clear. And I am really sorry for that silly confusion.😥😥 | |
| Aug 17, 2020 at 18:27 | history | edited | Thirsty for concepts | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 190 characters in body
|
| Aug 17, 2020 at 18:24 | comment | added | Thirsty for concepts | Hope it is clear now. And sry for the confusion I created. I was just talking of any generalised information which is not in the form of EM waves also like the disturbance of gravitational field which will propagate at a speed less than 'c' | |
| Aug 17, 2020 at 18:22 | comment | added | Thirsty for concepts | But if the information is in the form of 'electromagnetic waves' then it will also travel at the same speed as light,i.e, 'c'. This is exactly what sir Philip has written in his answer. He has considered the disturbances are the electromagnetic fields only and that is exactly what your question raises. I have made it generalised for any field. So basically I want to tell that "No information can travel faster than light" but electromagnetic waves will travel at the speed of light as light itself is an electromagnetic wave | |
| Aug 17, 2020 at 18:06 | comment | added | Thirsty for concepts | I am just saying that imagine(just imagine) if suppose the proton suddenly disappears. And at the very same instant(exact time) it emits a beam of light. Then first it will see the photon emitted by the proton and after a very very very small instant it will go off path. U can also think of how we first see lightning and then hear the sound. In this case instead of that sound, its actually the force between the proton and electron which had bound the electron in its orbit. | |
| Aug 17, 2020 at 17:45 | comment | added | Vaibhav Pankhala | "Imagine that suppose, when the proton disappears,it emits a flash of light. Then the electron will realise the proton's absence only after it sees the light emitted by proton(this is just an hypothetical example)." one line more to add for clarification in answers. | |
| Aug 17, 2020 at 17:41 | comment | added | Vaibhav Pankhala | @Thirsty for concepts. please check Phillip's answer's comments in which i expressed my doubt. | |
| Aug 17, 2020 at 14:31 | comment | added | Philip | I agree that our answers are very similar. @VaibhavPankhala you seem to be finding contradictions where there are none. Perhaps you can edit your question explaining what exactly it is that confuses you about these different answers? While none of the answers here are identical, they all respond to your question, and they all contain different ways of seeing the same thing, with different examples: Coulomb's law is only valid in the very restrictive case of electrostatics. If you explain why you think the answers contradict each other, we may be able to help. | |
| Aug 17, 2020 at 13:59 | comment | added | Thirsty for concepts | Howcome? He also concludes that there can't be instantaneous realisation....in fact he explains it in a very nice way using very nice maths. I am not much aware of the mathematical interpretation, so I just gave an logical explanation, but still both of us have the same conclusion. Pls read his last lines...Hope it clears your doubt. If not, feel free to comment. | |
| Aug 17, 2020 at 13:54 | comment | added | Vaibhav Pankhala | check answer of Phillip. your and his answer contradicts and i am confused. | |
| Aug 17, 2020 at 13:30 | history | answered | Thirsty for concepts | CC BY-SA 4.0 |