Charges without fields, fields without charges

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter lalbatros
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Charges Fields
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the theoretical exploration of electrodynamics, specifically the concepts of "charges without fields" and "fields without charges." Participants examine the implications of these theories, referencing historical perspectives from Feynman and Wheeler, and consider the role of singularities in electromagnetic fields.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Michel introduces the idea of a "fields without charges" theory, suggesting that fields could be primary while charges are secondary concepts represented by singularities.
  • Another participant expresses uncertainty about the implications of a source-less interpretation of electromagnetic theory, noting that fields and singularities could encapsulate the necessary information.
  • Michel critiques the notion of complicating mathematics unnecessarily if it does not enhance understanding, while acknowledging the benefits of the "charges without fields" theory proposed by Wheeler and Feynman.
  • Discussion includes the advanced force in Wheeler and Feynman's theory, which raises questions about causality and self-reaction in charges.
  • One participant reflects on the lack of effects from quantization of charge in classical electromagnetic theory, contrasting it with the quantization of energy in black body radiation.
  • There is a recognition of neglected areas in classical electromagnetism, suggesting that further exploration could be fruitful.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications and feasibility of theories regarding charges and fields, with no consensus reached on the validity or utility of the proposed theories.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in current understanding, including the dependence on definitions of charges and fields, and the unresolved nature of certain mathematical aspects related to these theories.

lalbatros
Messages
1,247
Reaction score
2
Hello,

As many people, I have been fascinated by the "Classical electrodynamics in terms of direct interparticle interaction" theory developped by Feynman and that he abandonned later. This is a representation of electrodynamics where fields play no direct role: they do no appear in the least action principle and pop up only as auxilliary quantities. There is no action of an electron on itself.

I would be curious to know if an opposite theory has been investigated: "fields without charges".
This would be a theory where only electromagnetics fields have the major role.
Charges would not appear in the Lagrangian, only fields.
Of course, singularities of the fields would be identified to charges, but they would not appear as primitive concepts, but as secondary a secondary concept: fields could have singularities, with some consequences.

Would some of you have seen something like that?

Thanks,

Michel
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Michel,

I do not know in detail Feynman theory for interaction-based-only electrodynamics (nor I understand how you could not have self-force) but for its basic equations.

I have wondered myself about your source-less interpretation of electromagnetic theory because as you said the fields and their singularities already tell the whole story.

I guess it is mainly a question of conventions and formalism, some problems will be harder to describe without mentioning isolated particles.

One point that I find particularly interesting is the connection between quantization of charge and theory of residues (encirclements of singularities)
 
You are right dgOnPhys.

If the game was only about making maths more intricate just to avoid the sight particles in the Lagrangian, it would really be useless. In addition we would need to detect singularities! We could better pretend that the classical formulation is simpler and complete, why bother then?

In contrast, the "charges without fields" theory developed by Wheeler and Feynman, comes with a bonus: no self action of a charge on itself. And there is also a cost for this: an advanced force appears in the equations of motion. This advanced force could be considered a defect on the ground of causality. It can also be shown to disappear under certain assumptions, as Wheeler and Feynman did in their paper "http://books.google.com/books?id=qn...bsorber as a mechanism of radiation’&f=false"". Dissipation on the edge of the universe, as I understood it, would in the end remove the advanced term and pay the bonus back: a consistent self-reaction of the charge that explains radiative damping.

I wonder if there would be any bonus in a field-only point of view.

Michel
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for the article and your explanation about self-force as induced by charge at infinity, I will definitely have a look.

Your question about possible payback of an alternative point of view makes a lot of sense to me but I am not sure I can take much of a guess as of what that could be.

As I mentioned before I have always been surprised that quantization of charge (discrete singularities) does not induce any effect in classical electromagnetic theory as for example quantization of energy does in the black body radiation.

There are plenty of shady areas in classical electromagnetism that are currently being neglected as most focus their efforts on more fashionable areas of physics... too bad!

I guess I have some work cut out for my retirement years...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
513
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
6K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
Replies
92
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
973