I was reading a paper of the same name by Oleg D. Jefimenko; here is the concerned text:
[...] relativistic force transformation equations demand the presence of an electric field when the interactions between electric charges are assumed to be entirely due to a magnetic force. We could interpret this result as the evidence that the electric field is a relativistic effect. But the well known fact that similar calculations demand the presence of a magnetic field, if the interactions between the charges are assumed to be entirely due to an electric force, makes such an interpretation impossible (unless we are willing to classify both the magnetic and the electric field as relativistic effects, which is absurd).
Both fields—the electric field and the magnetic field are necessary to make interactions between electric charges relativistically correct.By inference then, any force field compatible with the relativity theory must have an electric-like ‘subfield’ and a magnetic-like ‘subfield’.
I, being a total novice, have no expertise in special relativity. But I read that magnetism is really due to Coulomb's Law.
This is taken from Chris White's answer here:
[...] magnetism is nothing more than electrostatics combined with special relativity.
And this is taken from the horse's mouth; from Purcell's Electricity and Magnetism:
[...] the magnetic interaction of electric currents can be recognized as an inevitable corollary to Coulomb's Law. If the postulates of relativity are valid, if electric charge is invariant, and if Coulomb's law holds, then the effects we commonly call "magnetic" are bound to occur.
These two statements speak volumes to the fact that magnetic field is due to electrostatics and relativity; which ought make it a relativistic effect, isn't it?
then why did Jefimenko tell otherwise?
He did deduce in that paper the electric field is due to the magnetic interaction combined with relativity!
Prior to the reading of that paper, I bore in mind that if magnetic interaction occurs due to Coulomb's Law, then electric field is more fundamental.
But, this is completely contrary to what Jefimenko said; if I consider the interaction between charges to be magnetic, then the relativistic force transformation equation makes sure the existence of electric fields; so magnetic field is more fundamental?
My questions are:
$\bullet$ Is Jefimenko contradicting the statement of Purcell? What did he actually want to say?
$\bullet$ What should be the actual interpretation if it is wrong to assert that 'magnetism is nothing more than electrostatics combined with special relativity'?