Exceptions to the Laws of Physics: Newton's Third Law

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the applicability of Newton's Third Law, particularly in the context of quantum mechanics and potential exceptions to this law. Participants explore whether there are scenarios where Newton's Third Law may not hold, especially in relation to magnetic forces between charged particles.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that Newton's First and Second Laws are not applicable at the quantum level, leading to a search for exceptions to Newton's Third Law.
  • One participant claims that the "Law of Exceptions" implies no law of physics is truly universal, but this concept is challenged as not being a recognized law of physics.
  • Another participant argues that magnetic forces between protons moving at right angles do not adhere to Newton's Third Law, providing a specific example involving the forces acting on two protons.
  • Concerns are raised about the validity of claims regarding the non-existence of force in quantum mechanics, with requests for clarification and sources to support such statements.
  • Participants express uncertainty about the application of Ehrenfest's theorem in quantum mechanics and its relation to classical laws.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the applicability of Newton's Third Law in quantum mechanics. Multiple competing views are presented regarding the existence of exceptions and the interpretation of forces in quantum contexts.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions of force in quantum mechanics and the specific conditions under which Newton's laws may or may not apply. The discussion reflects varying levels of understanding and interpretation of quantum mechanics among participants.

Akshat
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
I've been noticing that there are exceptions to every scientific law. For Example, with Newton's First and Second Laws are totally invalid at the quantum level, but I'm failing to find such an example for Newton's Third Law. Is anyone able to help me?
 
Science news on Phys.org
There are no known exceptions to Newton's first and second law. Why not? Because every law also has a domain of applicability. So Newton's law are not incorrect, rather they are not applicable at quantum level.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bsheikho, CalcNerd, OCR and 4 others
I think what both of you are trying to say is the same thing. Akshat does not say that Newton's laws are incorrect but it can not be applied at the quantum level. Am I making some mistake?
 
Correct. I'm saying that according to the Law of Exceptions, no law of physics is truly universal. The first two laws' exceptions are in the quantum world, but I'm struggling to find the exception for the third law.
 
Akshat said:
I've been noticing that there are exceptions to every scientific law. For Example, with Newton's First and Second Laws are totally invalid at the quantum level, but I'm failing to find such an example for Newton's Third Law. Is anyone able to help me?

Whoa! Go back a bit. Where exactly in QM are Newton's 1st and 2nd laws "totally invalid"? What do you think you get when you apply Ehrenfest theorem in QM?

Zz.
 
ZapperZ said:
Whoa! Go back a bit. Where exactly in QM are Newton's 1st and 2nd laws "totally invalid"? What do you think you get when you apply Ehrenfest theorem in QM?

Zz.
I used the word invalid because Laws 1 and 2 involve force, and the classical concept of force doesn't exist. And I can't say anything about Ehrenfest, because I don't know anything about it. I'm just an incoming first year student.
 
Akshat said:
I used the word invalid because Laws 1 and 2 involve force, and the classical concept of force doesn't exist.

What do you mean that the concept of force doesn't exist in QM?

In a Schrödinger equation, when you write the central potential for a hydrogen atom, do you think that the gradient of that potential isn't a "force"?

I am trying very hard to figure out WHERE you got this idea that (i) there is no such thing as a "force", and that (ii) Newton's 1st and 2nd law are invalid in QM. Your explanation that you have given in this thread has been very vague. How about you either cite me your source, or give me a specific example to support your claim.

And I can't say anything about Ehrenfest, because I don't know anything about it. I'm just an incoming first year student.

But yet you seem to not be shy about making these claims in this thread. And what's to prevent you from looking it up?

http://www.reed.edu/physics/faculty/wheeler/documents/Quantum[/PLAIN] Mechanics/Miscellaneous Essays/Ehrenfest's Theorem.pdf

Look at the form that is practically equivalent to Newton's 2nd law!

Zz.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Akshat said:
according to the Law of Exceptions
The "law of exceptions" is not a recognized law of physics. Posts about it will be deleted.

Stick to the discussion about Newton's laws
 
Akshat said:
I've been noticing that there are exceptions to every scientific law. For Example, with Newton's First and Second Laws are totally invalid at the quantum level, but I'm failing to find such an example for Newton's Third Law. Is anyone able to help me?
Take two protons moving with velocities at right angles to each other. The magnetic forces exerted by each on the other do not follow Newton's third law.
 
  • #10
Chandra Prayaga said:
Take two protons moving with velocities at right angles to each other. The magnetic forces exerted by each on the other do not follow Newton's third law.

How so?
 
  • #11
Drakkith said:
How so?
Proton 1 (p1) moving in the positive x direction, currently at some position on the positive x-axis. Proton 2 (p2) moving in the positive y direction, currently at some position on the positive y-axis.
The magnetic field of p1 at the position of p2 is in the positive z direction (Biot-Savart law). So the force on p2 is in the + x direction (Lorentz force).
The magnetic field of p2 at the position of p1 is in the - z direction. The force on p1 is in + y direction.
So the two forces are not opposite to each other.
 

Similar threads

Graduate The violation of Newton's third Law
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
High School Why Does a Ball Bounce Back from a Wall But Not from Sand?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Undergrad Center of mass, Newton's third law, and rocket thrust
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Undergrad Newton's Third Law and Linear Momentum Conservation
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Graduate Elastic collisions and Newton's third law
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Undergrad An atomic explanation of Newton's Third Law of Motion
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
High School The application of Newton's laws to fluid equilibrium
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
High School What Are the Correct Units for Kepler's Third Law?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Undergrad Question about Newton third law and NASA article
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Undergrad Does Newton's or Galileo's first law depend on gravity?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K