Timeline for Is the concept of a field necessary to electrodynamics?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 19, 2014 at 15:48 | comment | added | dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten | All I can say is that asserting that the energy and momentum of the wave are still related to the source particle after it has already recoiled is more deserving of the phase "convenient mathematic[s]" than treating the fields as real. Or perhaps "inconvenient mathematics". | |
| Jan 19, 2014 at 15:43 | comment | added | Ján Lalinský | Yes, but they carry energy and momentum only if the description uses them, which is not necessary (in classical theory). When retarded fields are used, they can still be thought to be connected to sources (material objects). | |
| Jan 19, 2014 at 1:38 | comment | added | dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten | The fields carry both energy and momentum. In the form of electromagnetic waves those---deeply fundamental---quantities are connected with no material object (the source having already recoiled, and the absorber not having reacted yet). That's real enough for me. | |
| Jan 19, 2014 at 1:25 | history | answered | Ján Lalinský | CC BY-SA 3.0 |