Timeline for Are the Maxwell's equations enough to derive the law of Coulomb?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 12, 2020 at 19:28 | history | edited | wonderich | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Jan 22, 2014 at 8:37 | comment | added | Ján Lalinský | In the first part of your derivation, you talk about deriving Maxwell equations, so there $f_{\mu\nu}, A_\mu$ are total fields produced by prescribed sources. In the second part after "How about the Lorentz force law? ", if by $f_{\mu\nu}, A_\mu$ you refer to external fields, the derivation is correct, but please consider making this clear in your text: due to the first part and even without it, when most people see these symbols, they assume they refer to the total field. | |
| Jan 22, 2014 at 5:32 | comment | added | wonderich | So your comment is actually NOT to my point. | |
| Jan 22, 2014 at 5:29 | comment | added | wonderich | @ Ján Lalinský, thanks but you miss my point. The field is NOT from the singular-size point particle, but from the external source surrounding it. Such as external current, electric planes, etc. The derivation is carried out the external EM effects on the point particle. | |
| Jan 22, 2014 at 5:08 | comment | added | Ján Lalinský | The above sketch of derivation of force on point particles appears in good books, but has a fundamental flaw for point particles. For such particles, the interaction field term has no value, since the field is singular at the particle, and the pure field term is infinite, which invalidates any formal differentiation. The result, although it seems correct, is wrong: as vector potential, the total electric and magnetic fields are not defined at the place of the particle $\vec{x}$. | |
| Jan 16, 2014 at 1:32 | history | edited | wonderich | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 characters in body
|
| Jan 16, 2014 at 1:23 | history | answered | wonderich | CC BY-SA 3.0 |