Re: Maxwell, Einstein and displacement current

From: jahn (suzysewnshow_at_yahoo.com.au)
Date: 09/14/04 

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 19:13:47 -0400

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@rubbish.net.au> wrote in message
news:mTJ1d.31094$D7.14659@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "jahn" <suzysewnshow@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:2qoav6F11iko5U1@uni-berlin.de...
> >
> > Exerpt:
> > The first problematical point arises if we want to distinguish "physical
> > space" from the space-time diagrams of which classical mechanics makes
> use.
>
> How about more actual experimentally verifiable predictions and less
> semantic quibbling - 'physical space', 'really real', 'objective reality',
> 'effects effecting' and all the other junk this ilk delusionally think is
> science.
I have no control over what the authors write.
But yes.. they seem to be pointing out some ambiguities within the
community with respect to space and time. I suppose you could
call that semantics.
>
> > Admitted that the relations indicated by Einstein represent Faraday's
> > electromagnetic induction and Maxwell's displacement current in
Amp`ere's
> > equation respectively, the invariance of Maxwell's equation system
> involves
> > mechanical transformation properties of the fields at small velocities.
>
> Mechanical transformation properties?
>
> > These transformation properties are by no means shared by "physical
> space".
>
> Very easy to say things like that with impunity when you are vague about
> "physical space" is.
>
They are vague because the works they refer to were vague.
<< Therefore, the expressions of the fields in empty space could already be
considered equivalent to thermodynamic potentials. Instead, this is not
quite correct because the equations with partial derivatives of which the
fields are solutions establish only the dependence between variations and do
not allow specifying functional expressions. But the fields in vacuo are
obtained, for the mathematical theorem of existence and uniqueness of the
solutions of differential equation systems, when the initial and boundary
conditions are specified. Then the question is, how to obtain non trivial
solutions. Indeed, assumed the relativity principle, and given the
mathematical expression of an electromagnetic field, it is understandable
that it does not reach thermodynamic equilibrium unless dissipation did not
characterize that solution initially. In a word, for purely mathematical
reasons, no solution of Maxwell's equations satisfying boundary and initial
conditions, and not corresponding to "blackbody radiation" initially will
merge with it at the end of all the transients. In conclusion, the premise
for interpreting electromagnetic fields as local energy perturbations in
space and transport of electrical charges is that the arguments x, y, z and
t take on a single meaning for all the theories involved and possibly that
of coordinates of "physical space". >>
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0403050
-------------
Kind regards,
Sue...
>
> > Again, the uniformity and isotropy prescribed for temperature radiation
in
> > the oven cavity do not coincide with a superposition of stationary waves
> in
> > space-time.
>
> Even assuming the above makes sense (and I can not make sense of it) your
> point being?
I saw somewhere in another thread where Maxwell's equations were found
Lorentz invarient... that just didn't make sense with the displacement
current
problem so I was looking for something to take a closer look at it perhaps
from another angle.
>
> Rest of junk along the same lines mercifully snipped.
Indeed... I didn't want to look *that* close LOL
Kind regards,
Sue...
>
> Bill
>
>