Sorry, I was asking if the units were compatible with T, S, U and Q for any number of dimensions.
No, I was just wondering what topic or branch this question falls under.
In the Wikipedia article posted above, they write that the formula "follows from the Maxwell stress tensor of classical electrodynamics".
I'm gonna ask a dummy question; does this method say anything about the units of u and P?
That's pretty neat. What branch of mathematics is that under?
This shows the derivation of the Stefan-Boltzmann law....
Nice. How did you work that out? Is an exponential function the only solution to this problem?
I'm trying to solve some statistical mechanics. This problem appeared....
The units of pressure will no longer be the same in higher dimensions though. Is that supposed to be the case?
ok. but why do you think that it is impossible? someday we might find a way to harness enough energy.
and anyway for this thread I want to focus...
Do you have any link regarding that? Not that I don't believe you.
Anyway, this thread is less about rocket energy and more about tracking position.
Can I say that using a tensor will lead to a slightly different transformation of E and B, (as compared to the component by component basis) which...
That's fine, I made a mistake too.
If we had considered the top set (#23, the post above), without the (x) and (x'), instead, what would have...
I think our confusion stems from the fact that we were on different wavelengths regarding which set of transformations we were supposed to...
I do apologize for being vexing, I am easily confused, so I spend a lot of effort trying to get to the bottom of things.
Yes, but the rockets still have to be tested after they have been built. I'm just wondering what methods future engineers might use to accomplish...
Are these two sets of transformations considered identical, or is there a slight difference?
& E'_x = E_x & \qquad & B'_x = B_x...
do you want to move back to the older thread?
Sorry, I guess my question wasn't stated specifically enough. :oops:
So are the fields a function of ##x## only or of all the spatial coordinates?
kuruman, do you skate? To complement theory with experiment haha
An anagram eh? Dr. Eischen?
In that case might I direct you to an earlier thread of mine: (post #31 onwards, full convo also posted below)...
Yeah. But can they be applied to E and B fields of any shape or form, say spherical wavefronts? Or only to plane waves?
So you were just trolling? ?:) Damn.
What if we consider flat spacetime only?
Yup, all the vectors are pointing in the same direction. Just linear acceleration.
Yes, that's what I said, now I need a good way to practically...
Nooo, you have to stop talking like that.
I have a question regarding these transformation formulas:
& E'_x = E_x & \qquad & B'_x = B_x \\
& E'_y = \gamma \left( E_y - v...
relative to the frame which you are in, making the measurements.
The Lorentz factor? based on the speed of the rocket
How small and cold does a cavity have to be before it starts deviating from Planck's law significantly?
Separate names with a comma.