Maxwell's Equations: Exact or Approximate?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ehrenfest
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Maxwell's equations
AI Thread Summary
Maxwell's equations are considered mathematically exact but are not physically exact due to the presence of fundamental constants like epsilon and mu, which are measured quantities. While they provide a good approximation for modeling electromagnetic phenomena, the constants involved introduce a level of uncertainty. The discussion touches on the philosophical aspect of physical exactness, questioning whether anything can be considered truly exact in the physical world. The conversation also includes a light-hearted analogy about apples to illustrate the complexities of measurement and physical reality, along with a humorous reference to physicists and their interactions. Overall, the consensus acknowledges that while Maxwell's equations are precise mathematically, their physical application is inherently approximate.
ehrenfest
Messages
2,001
Reaction score
1
Are Maxwell's equations thought to be exact? I realize this question is very open-ended and loosely-phrased.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes they are. But keep in mind that each one of maxwell's equations inevitably contains some sort of fundamental constant (mu or epsilon usually; not to mention electric charge etc etc) which are measured quantities and therein not exact.
Does that answer your question?
 
Yes.
 
They're not exactly exact. QED makes slightly different predictions from classical electromagnetism.
 
Mathematically, correct hence exact. Physically, it's a good approximation and only an approximation to model phenomena. Hence not exact physically. Is anything exact physically? No.
 
lzkelley said:
Yes they are. But keep in mind that each one of maxwell's equations inevitably contains some sort of fundamental constant (mu or epsilon usually; not to mention electric charge etc etc) which are measured quantities and therein not exact.

lz, be careful.

which constant in Maxwell's equation is measured and not defined (to an exact value)?
 
Epsilon-not.

Mu-not is defined. At least, that's what my professor said.
 
Poop-Loops said:
Epsilon-not.

Mu-not is defined. At least, that's what my professor said.

you mean this epsilon-not ?
 
  • #10
tgt said:
Mathematically, correct hence exact. Physically, it's a good approximation and only an approximation to model phenomena. Hence not exact physically. Is anything exact physically? No.

I have one apple, I add another one, I have exactly two apples.
 
  • #11
dst said:
I have one apple, I add another one, I have exactly two apples.
Well, if you take into account the masses of the apples, which is what is physically relevant when you buy apples, then you have less mass when the two apples are together, right ? :biggrin:
 
  • #12
humanino said:
Well, if you take into account the masses of the apples, which is what is physically relevant when you buy apples, then you have less mass when the two apples are together, right ? :biggrin:
Pfft, technicalities. If truth be told, the error is in disguise - it's either present in the definition(s) or as a constant in whatever expression you're using.

On the other hand, there is no match for the physics of two cows™.

You have two communist cows.
 
  • #13
Poop-Loops said:
Epsilon-not.

Mu-not is defined. At least, that's what my professor said.

by the way, that's
epsilon-http://www.answers.com/naught&r=67" (epsilon-zero) and similarly for mu-naught.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #14
humanino said:
Well, if you take into account the masses of the apples, which is what is physically relevant when you buy apples, then you have less mass when the two apples are together, right ? :biggrin:

so, that applies, too, when two physicists get together?:wink:
 
  • #15
humanino said:
Well, if you take into account the masses of the apples, which is what is physically relevant when you buy apples, then you have less mass when the two apples are together, right ? :biggrin:

Umm--what? Are you using special relativity?
 
  • #16
rewebster said:
so, that applies, too, when two physicists get together?:wink:
I guess so :smile:
edit
Actually, it depends. If they disagree on the status of "is string a theory ?", their interaction can be very exothermic.
ehrenfest said:
Umm--what? Are you using special relativity?
They have gravitational biding energy, don't they ?
 
Back
Top