Maxwell's Equations: Solving a Puzzlement for Bob

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Wannabeagenius
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation and implications of Maxwell's equations, particularly in the context of inertial reference frames and the historical understanding of physics at the turn of the twentieth century. Participants explore the relationship between electromagnetic phenomena and the concept of absolute versus relative motion.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Historical
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Bob expresses confusion regarding the applicability of Maxwell's equations across different inertial reference frames, suggesting a contradiction with the classical understanding of physics.
  • One participant clarifies that the concept of Galilean relativity implies that motion cannot be detected without external reference, but the behavior of charged particles in magnetic fields introduces complexities that led to the development of Maxwell's equations.
  • This participant notes that the Michelson-Morley experiment aimed to detect absolute motion using light but resulted in a null outcome, supporting the idea of relative motion and leading to the formulation of special relativity.
  • Another participant challenges Bob's characterization of physicists at the turn of the twentieth century as "smug," arguing that many were grappling with significant unresolved issues, particularly regarding the interaction of moving charges.
  • Bob acknowledges the myth surrounding the confidence of physicists at the time, referencing the historical anecdote of Newton and the apple as a comparison.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the historical context of physicists' confidence in their knowledge, with some arguing against the notion of widespread smugness and others supporting Bob's initial claim. The discussion on the implications of Maxwell's equations and the nature of motion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexities surrounding the interpretation of electromagnetic theory and its historical context, including the limitations of early experiments and the evolving understanding of motion in physics.

Wannabeagenius
Messages
90
Reaction score
0
Hi All,

I understand that at the turn of the twentieth century, Physicists were rather smug and thought that they knew all there was to know; however, as I understand it, there was a glaring problem with one of the main laws of Physics, namely that all the laws of Physics are the same in all Inertial Reference frames.

I'm specifically referring to Maxwell's equations which show the speed of light to be a universal constant but this was not the case in all Inertial Reference frames as defined classically.

Please clarify this puzzlement for me.

Thank you,
Bob
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not sure what puzzle you are talking about. Actually, the point you cite in your paragraph is little more fundamental than that. What is often called "Gallilean relativity" is based on an idea Galilleo himself mentioned: If you are completely inside a closed car, no windows, moving in a straight line, at a constant speed, no acceleration, without any bumping (which would be an acceleration), there would be no experiment you could do which would tell you how fast you are moving or if you are moving at all.

But, by the middle of the 19th century, physicists knew that the force exerted on a charged particle by a magnetic field depended on the particles speed (this led to Maxwell's equations). That seemed to imply that you could do an experiment, involving electro-magnetic forces, that Galileo knew nothing about, inside a closed cart, that would tell you how fast you were going. Not "how fast relative to some outside reference" but just "how fast"- and that speed would be absolute rather than relative to some reference.

Naturally, scientists of the time were anxious to do such an experiment. But ordinary "electric" and "magnetic" measurements were just not precise enough. Since light is an "electro-magnetic" phenomenon (this is where Maxwells equation come in again since they can be manipulated to show that waves in electro-magnetic fields propagate at the speed of light), and light measurements can be made very accurately, scientists tried using light. In 1887, Michaelson and Morley finally did such an experiment- and it gave a null result. That is, Galileo was stillright. Even electro-magnetic experiments, in a closed environment, could tell how fast that closed environment was moving or if it was moving at all. The explanation of how that could be reconciled with Maxwell's laws was the special theory of relativity.
 
"I understand that at the turn of the twentieth century, Physicists were rather smug and thought that they knew all there was to know;" is an apocryphal statement based on an out of context quote of one (too) senior physicist. As you intimate, most theoretical physicists were seriously troubled by a number of unsolved problems. Understanding how two moving charges interacted was one of the major unsolved problems. This is why the title of Einstein's relativity paper was "The Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies".
 
clem said:
"I understand that at the turn of the twentieth century, Physicists were rather smug and thought that they knew all there was to know;" is an apocryphal statement based on an out of context quote of one (too) senior physicist. As you intimate, most theoretical physicists were seriously troubled by a number of unsolved problems. Understanding how two moving charges interacted was one of the major unsolved problems. This is why the title of Einstein's relativity paper was "The Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies".

OK and thank you!

Now I know that it's a myth that physicists at the time thought that the only thing left to do in Physics was to add more decimal places to the constants of Physics such as G.

I guess this isn't as ridiculous as Newton being hit on the head with an apple!:smile:

Bob
 
The apple story was originally related by someone who recalled Newton telling him about it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
8K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K