Terminology that is inconsistent with basic physic definitions

AI Thread Summary
Advanced physics articles often use terminology that can be confusing, such as "pure energy," which lacks a clear definition in standard references. This term is typically associated with high-energy physics and the early universe, where it is believed that energy existed before matter. The concept of time is similarly complex; while definitions exist, they often rely on mathematical frameworks rather than straightforward explanations. Resources like the "McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Terms" can provide clarity on these terms, though a general Google search may yield useful information as well. Understanding these concepts often requires familiarity with the context in which they are used in physics.
Henry Jones
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
When reading advanced physics articles, I frequently find terminology that is inconsistent with basic physics definitions. For example: "pure energy". I have no idea what that expression means. I have read much about space-time, the arrow or time, etc, but no definition of "time". Where might I find a source of physics terminology and definitions, as used today?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Henry Jones,

As I was reading your post I happened to have sitting next to the "McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Terms". Maybe something like that is what you're looking for.

But if you don't mind sorting through some irrelevant junk, it's hard to beat a Google Search for info on just about anything.

By the way, I looked up both your terms in that MG Tech Dictionary.

Nothing for "pure energy" although that term is usually used the context of high energy or cosmological physics. It comes from the matter-energy equality that Einstein discovered a hundred years ago. Most things in the universe today are mixtures of matter and energy. But it's thought by physicists that at the instant the universe was formed, there was no matter. It was just pure-energy. Within a small fraction of second the energy began turning into matter.

Time is a tricky one! So is its counterpart-space, or position. Physicist sort of wave their hands on these, and say "we know what we mean by time and space, and if there's ever any disagreement we'll settle it with some math!" The MG Tech Dictionary did have a definition for time, something like, "The dimension of the physical universe which at a given location in space, specifies the ordered sequence of events." Not bad.

By the way, in Einstein's first paper on his theory of relativity, which was fundamentally about time and our perception of it, did he resort to some fancy arcane definion to base his theory on? No. He talked about what it means to say "the train will arrive at the station at 7 pm". We all know what he means! :wink:
 
Actually time isn't normally defined any more than "x" is defined. Time is one of the coordinates one used to specify an event. It's value depends on the coordinate system chosen. Normally, "time interval", the time span between two events is of much more interest (in the same way that the distance between to points is of more interest than just the coordinates of a point in some arbitrary coordinate system) and that is what is defined.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Thread 'A scenario of non-uniform circular motion'
(All the needed diagrams are posted below) My friend came up with the following scenario. Imagine a fixed point and a perfectly rigid rod of a certain length extending radially outwards from this fixed point(it is attached to the fixed point). To the free end of the fixed rod, an object is present and it is capable of changing it's speed(by thruster say or any convenient method. And ignore any resistance). It starts with a certain speed but say it's speed continuously increases as it goes...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...

Similar threads

Back
Top