Discover the Real Gem: Neoclassical Theory of Electromagnetic Interactions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the book "Neoclassical Theory of Electromagnetic Interactions" by Babin & Figotin, exploring its validity and relevance in the context of electromagnetic theory. Participants express varying opinions on the authors' qualifications, the book's content, and its potential as a resource for learning electromagnetism.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant finds the book appealing and questions its value as an investment amidst many theories in modern physics.
  • Another participant advises against purchasing the book for learning electromagnetism, citing the authors' lack of physics credentials and the claim of presenting a "new theory."
  • A participant with a background in mathematics expresses interest in the book despite acknowledging their existing knowledge of electromagnetism, seeking opinions from those who have studied it.
  • One reply challenges the notion that physics books by mathematicians are inherently inferior, providing historical examples of successful works by mathematicians in theoretical physics.
  • Another participant criticizes the authors' understanding of fundamental concepts, specifically mentioning the "Lorenz gauge," and dismisses the book as lacking quality.
  • A participant shares a link to a presentation by the authors, suggesting it may provide additional insights into their work.
  • Another participant recommends alternative advanced texts on electromagnetism, mentioning specific titles and their perceived strengths.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing opinions on the book's merit, with some defending the potential contributions of mathematicians to physics while others strongly criticize the authors and the book's content. No consensus is reached regarding the book's value or the authors' qualifications.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of authors' backgrounds in evaluating the quality of physics literature, indicating a potential bias against works by non-physicists. The discussion also reflects varying standards for what constitutes a valuable resource in the field of electromagnetism.

coquelicot
Messages
301
Reaction score
68
TL;DR Summary: Book: Neoclassical Theory of Electromagnetic Interactions - A Single Theory for Macroscopic and Microscopic Scales

I've found the book of Babin & Figotin:
Neoclassical Theory of Electromagnetic Interactions - A Single Theory for Macroscopic and Microscopic Scales.
I like their ideas. This looks good, but do you think it's a good investment?
The problem in modern physics is that there are too many authors and theories. It's not so easy to recognize the real gems.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why are you buying it? If it is to learn electromagnetism, I wouldn't.

A. The authors call it a "new theory"
B. The authors aren't physicists. They are mathematicians, and only one is faculty.

If you want to learn standard E&M, this does not look like the best choice.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters, coquelicot, Demystifier and 2 others
Actually, I already know EM pretty well.
But their theory seem interesting, and being myself a mathematician, I think this is only good for physics. I would like to know the opinion of someone who has studied their book.
 
Last edited:
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: weirdoguy
coquelicot said:
No need to open a thread for that. It is only in parentheses, and a reply to the above boiling down statement that physics books by mathematician are necessarily bad.
This is, of course, nonsense. There are brillant books on theoretical physics written by mathematicians. Historical examples are Weyl's, Raum, Zeit, Materie and von Neumann's book on the mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics.

What these example also demonstrate is that you must be careful when it comes to the physics part. Weyl had the superficially brillant idea to gauge the scale invariance of the free gravitational field in GR to describe the electromagnetic field as the corresponding gauge field. The only disadvantage is that it's physically impossible, because it contradicts the simple fact that the spatial and temporal scales of charged matter doesn't depend on its electromagnetic history, as both Einstein and Pauli immediately pointed out to Weyl. Nevertheless the idea is indeed brillant, because the principle of making global symmetries local lead to a tremendous success in model building in connection with relativistic quantum field theory and the understanding of the fundamental interactions in terms of the Standard Model of elementary particle physics, which heavily builds on this idea of "gauge invariance".
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters, Demystifier, coquelicot and 1 other person
2 authors from the Soviet space working in California cannot even get the „Lorenz gauge” right. Other than that, the book is junk. Tells a lot about the level of Springer nowadays. Anybody can publish a book.
 
  • Sad
  • Love
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Astronuc, vanhees71, malawi_glenn and 1 other person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • Sticky
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
11K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
7K