Maxwell's Equation and Special Relativity

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between Maxwell's Equations, permittivity, permeability, and Special Relativity. It questions how Maxwell conceptualized free space's permittivity and permeability without quantum field theory, suggesting these constants stem from experimental results. Participants clarify that free space does not inherently possess these properties; rather, they were introduced for unit correlation in physics. The speed of light, denoted as 'c', is emphasized as a fundamental constant that emerged from Maxwell's work, not as a property of free space. The conversation concludes by noting that Maxwell's acceptance of a finite speed of light aligns with the principles of Special Relativity.
sergei flamel
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I've got a couple of question about Maxwell's Equation and its relation to Special Relativity.

1. Why do we think that free space has permittivity and permeability? For me, due to quantum effects free space should have permittivity and permeability, but how did Maxwell accept that the free space has permittivity and permeability? What did he based the idea of "permittivity and permeability" on? Well, I could think that they are just experimental results, but how did he explain the "permittivity and permeability of free space" to himself without any clue on quantum field theory?

2. So, in the presence of permittivity and permeability of free space, we know "the speed of light" can be written in terms of those quantities. However, if there were no permittivity and permeability, them c -> infinity. So, by accepting that the free space has permittivity and permeability, a finite speed of light emerges naturally. Thus, I don't see why it is surprising to see that Maxwell's Equations are consistent with Special Relativity. Of course it would be consistant because it assumes that even in the free space, the speed of light cannot be infinity. ( Ok, I know relativity is much more than that, but accepting that the speed of light is finite in free space is too much for 1861 )

3. I, personally think that "the speed of light" should be much more unique than just the speed of a photon. For instance, gravitational waves also travels with speed of light and they don't have such electromagnetic properties. So, obviously we cannot impose those "permittivity and permeability" things on gravitational waves. So, could I safely assume that, inside a fluid, gravitational waves travels faster than light? Than what happens to relativity? How should I write Lorentz Transformations in this case? Do I need a relativity which keeps two speeds constant instead of one?

Thanks for the answers :-)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
sergei flamel said:
1. Why do we think that free space has permittivity and permeability? For me, due to quantum effects free space should have permittivity and permeability, but how did Maxwell accept that the free space has permittivity and permeability? What did he based the idea of "permittivity and permeability" on? Well, I could think that they are just experimental results, but how did he explain the "permittivity and permeability of free space" to himself without any clue on quantum field theory?
Free space does NOT have permittivity epsilonzero and permeability muzero.
The QED "vacuum polarization" is a kind of p and p, but that is a higher order quantum effect.
Maxwell DID NOT accept that the free space has permittivity and permeability.
Maxwell only accepted c, and in fact devised an experiment to measure c even before he showed it was the speed of light. c was originally introduced as the relation between magnetic and electrical phenomena.
The constants epsilonzero and muzero were introduced in a clumsy attempt to correlate the units of physics with units that engineers like. They have nothing to do with properties of free space. In fact muzero/4pi is just a pure power of ten relating mks to cgs units, and the ampere to the original absolute ampere.
 
This is from Griffiths' Electrodynamics, 3rd edition, page 352. I am trying to calculate the divergence of the Maxwell stress tensor. The tensor is given as ##T_{ij} =\epsilon_0 (E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} E^2)+\frac 1 {\mu_0}(B_iB_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} B^2)##. To make things easier, I just want to focus on the part with the electrical field, i.e. I want to find the divergence of ##E_{ij}=E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij}E^2##. In matrix form, this tensor should look like this...
Thread 'Applying the Gauss (1835) formula for force between 2 parallel DC currents'
Please can anyone either:- (1) point me to a derivation of the perpendicular force (Fy) between two very long parallel wires carrying steady currents utilising the formula of Gauss for the force F along the line r between 2 charges? Or alternatively (2) point out where I have gone wrong in my method? I am having problems with calculating the direction and magnitude of the force as expected from modern (Biot-Savart-Maxwell-Lorentz) formula. Here is my method and results so far:- This...
Back
Top