- #1
StarsFly
- 8
- 0
I am giving a presentation on the principle of induction. I'll be showing how acoustic energy (sound) is converted into an electrical signal (via mic) & thus converted back into acoustic energy (via loudspeaker). Now I need to address the following,
How & Why?
How doesn't bother me. I can satisfy that using laws (Lenz, Faraday). It's the why that gets me. I can explain to the audience that the only reason a voltage is induced is so it can create a magnetic field to "oppose" the change in flux. So to answer your question Timothy, it's because nature is trying to balance itself out. I guess my logic is flawed. Here are the responses I have received,
The laws of nature in this universe are set by the so-called constants of nature. There are twenty some of these constants; among which are Planck's Constant, the universal gravity constant, the speed of light, pi, and so on.
&
This is not a physics questions. This is a philosophy question, and to a certain extent, a religious question. Physics asks questions about what the rules are. Philosophy asks why. You have indeed set yourself a difficult task. You are effectively looking for an explanation to the Unified Field Theory. A voltage is not created with the purpose of generating a magnetic field. A magnetic field is a natural consequence of a voltage. The different is not merely semantic. It is a matter of the causal direction. Whether or not "nature is trying to balance itself" is also a philosophical question and is incompatible with a non-volitional nature. Nature isn't trying to balance itself. Nature is inherently balanced.Sure I can't explain why the constants are set the way they are, but why would it be so wrong of me to state that nature tends to progress towards stability
How & Why?
How doesn't bother me. I can satisfy that using laws (Lenz, Faraday). It's the why that gets me. I can explain to the audience that the only reason a voltage is induced is so it can create a magnetic field to "oppose" the change in flux. So to answer your question Timothy, it's because nature is trying to balance itself out. I guess my logic is flawed. Here are the responses I have received,
The laws of nature in this universe are set by the so-called constants of nature. There are twenty some of these constants; among which are Planck's Constant, the universal gravity constant, the speed of light, pi, and so on.
&
This is not a physics questions. This is a philosophy question, and to a certain extent, a religious question. Physics asks questions about what the rules are. Philosophy asks why. You have indeed set yourself a difficult task. You are effectively looking for an explanation to the Unified Field Theory. A voltage is not created with the purpose of generating a magnetic field. A magnetic field is a natural consequence of a voltage. The different is not merely semantic. It is a matter of the causal direction. Whether or not "nature is trying to balance itself" is also a philosophical question and is incompatible with a non-volitional nature. Nature isn't trying to balance itself. Nature is inherently balanced.Sure I can't explain why the constants are set the way they are, but why would it be so wrong of me to state that nature tends to progress towards stability
Last edited: