The stability of matter: is really Maxwell wrong? (part 2).

In summary, the conversation discusses the possibility of electrical systems that do not generate significant electromagnetic waves, and provides examples and calculations to support this idea. The question is raised whether classical theory can explain this phenomenon and the stability of matter. The response suggests that the level of background knowledge needed for this topic is not yet acquired. The thread is then closed.
  • #1
8
0
In a previous message I have tried to show that electrical systems exist which do not generate electromagnetic waves with appreciable energy even if such systems have parts in accelerated motion.
Now I add a further example by which the meaning of what I tried to say becomes clearer.
The problem is the following: it is required to investigate the character of the electromagnetic emission resulting from a sum of a great, very great number of sinusoidal plane electromagnetic waves (with same polarization) with same amplitude, same frequency and phase uniformly distributed on the whole 360 degrees angle.
It is not difficult to imagine a physical example of source whose emission is as above described.
This time calculations were made and the result is more than clear: the resulting emission is infinitely smaller in comparison to that we have when all the signals are in phase.
The fact is quite intuitive if we help us with the method of phasors.
So my question is always the same: are we really sure that Maxwell cannot explain the absence of appreciable electromagnetic emission from matter?
Are we really sure that classical theory cannot explain the stability of matter?
I have some doubt.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Anonimo said:
So my question is always the same: are we really sure that Maxwell cannot explain the absence of appreciable electromagnetic emission from matter?

Yes.

Anonimo said:
Are we really sure that classical theory cannot explain the stability of matter?

Yes.
 
  • #3
Dear Drakkith,
thank you for your response, surely clear and perhaps a little too concise.
 
  • #4
Anonimo said:
I have some doubt.

Then you have evidently not acquired the level of background knowledge that would be expected if you are going to start an "A" level (graduate level) thread on this topic. You should certainly be familiar with the classic paper on the topic by Dyson and Lenard:

https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.1705209

A more recent treatment is Lieb and Seiringer:

http://www.ams.org/journals/bull/2013-50-01/S0273-0979-2011-01366-0/S0273-0979-2011-01366-0.pdf

Anonimo said:
surely clear and perhaps a little too concise.

No, his answer was exactly right for an "A" level thread: the conciseness is a way of conveying to you that you should already have enough background knowledge to fill in the details for yourself. If you don't, you need to fix that before starting another thread on this topic.

Thread closed.
 
  • Like
Likes weirdoguy and StevieTNZ

1. What does "Maxwell wrong" mean in relation to the stability of matter?

"Maxwell wrong" refers to the idea that James Clerk Maxwell's equations, which are fundamental to our understanding of electromagnetism, may not fully explain the stability of matter. This has been a topic of debate among scientists for decades.

2. Why is the stability of matter important to study?

The stability of matter is crucial to our understanding of the physical world and plays a significant role in many fields of science, including physics, chemistry, and materials science. It also has practical applications, such as in the development of new materials and technologies.

3. What evidence suggests that Maxwell's equations may not fully explain the stability of matter?

There have been several experiments and observations that have raised questions about the validity of Maxwell's equations in certain situations. For example, the behavior of electrons in atoms and the properties of exotic materials such as superconductors cannot be fully explained by these equations.

4. What are some proposed alternative theories to explain the stability of matter?

Some scientists have proposed modifications to Maxwell's equations, while others have turned to completely new theories, such as quantum mechanics and string theory, to explain the stability of matter. However, these theories are still being studied and are not yet widely accepted.

5. How does the debate over Maxwell's equations impact our understanding of the stability of matter?

The ongoing debate over Maxwell's equations has led to a deeper exploration of the fundamental principles of matter and has sparked new research and theories. It challenges scientists to continuously question and improve upon our understanding of the natural world. Ultimately, this debate will contribute to a more comprehensive and accurate understanding of the stability of matter.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Physics
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
962
Replies
3
Views
717
Replies
3
Views
139
Replies
49
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
962
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
24
Views
1K
Back
Top