Galilean invariance of Maxwell equation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the Galilean invariance of Maxwell's equations, exploring whether these equations maintain their form under Galilean transformations. Participants examine the implications of the constant speed of light and the interpretations of various articles on the topic.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that Maxwell's equations are often claimed to lack covariance under Galilean transformations due to the constant speed of light, but questions the validity of this assertion.
  • Another participant references a specific article that discusses Galilean electromagnetism, suggesting it may provide insights into the topic.
  • A different participant critiques the referenced paper, claiming it misinterprets the meaning of epsilon zero in SI units and argues that Galilean invariance is broken because it would imply that the speed of light is not constant.
  • Another participant expresses appreciation for a resource shared in the thread, indicating it has enhanced their understanding of Einstein's contributions to the field.
  • A later reply questions the validity of the paper by Le Bellac et al., suggesting that while it systematically investigates non-relativistic limits of classical electromagnetics, it fails to account for the behavior of electromagnetic wave fields in a non-relativistic context.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of Maxwell's equations under Galilean transformations, with some supporting the idea of non-Galilean invariance and others challenging this perspective. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views present.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight potential misunderstandings regarding the constants used in different unit systems and the implications of non-relativistic limits, but these points remain open to interpretation and debate.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in the foundations of electromagnetism, the implications of relativity on classical physics, and the historical context of Einstein's work may find this discussion relevant.

sadegh4137
Messages
72
Reaction score
0
always say us Maxwell equations are not covariance under Galilean Transformation

They say merely this because of constant speed of light that the result of Maxwell Equations

But there arent any excitability prove for Non-Ggalilean invariance of Maxwell equation

I Decided try to show this
i found this article when i was searched net




do you think this is true?
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
You want to read:


@article{le1973galilean,
title={Galilean electromagnetism},
author={Le Bellac, M. and L{\'e}vy-Leblond, J.M.},
journal={Il Nuovo Cimento B (1971-1996)},
volume={14},
number={2},
pages={217--234},
year={1973},
publisher={Springer}
}
 
The paper is wrong. It misinterprets the meaning of epsilonzero in SI.
In any system of units, Maxwell derived that EM waves would propagate at c, which the paper is correct in saying was first measured by W and K. Galilean invariance is broken because it would make c no longer a constant. If you use, SI, then epsilonzero would no longer be constant, while miraculously muzero would be constant.
 
http://faculty.uml.edu/cbaird/95.658%282011%29/Lecture10.pdf"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
chrisbaird said:
http://faculty.uml.edu/cbaird/95.658%282011%29/Lecture10.pdf"
Thank you chrisbaird, this is an excellent read. I now have a greater understanding of Einstein’s work, genius, and boldness.

Believe it or not, I've been using the term bold (as the paper does) to describe Einstein for several years now.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What's concretely wrong with the paper by LeBellac et al? They investigate the well-known non-relativistic limits of classical electromagnetics in a systematic way. "Non-relativistic" can of course only mean to describe the matter (or more abstractly charges and currents) non-relativistically. Em. wave fields can never behave non-relativistic, but the static, stationary and quasi-stationary limits do.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
10K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
14K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
10K
  • · Replies 146 ·
5
Replies
146
Views
12K