Stationary Field: Why Professor and Books Differ

I
Thread starter ATY
Start date Feb 15, 2017
Tags

Field

In summary, the differences between professors and books in their understanding of stationary field can be attributed to various factors such as individual interpretations, outdated information, and different sources of knowledge. To determine which source is more accurate, one should consider multiple sources, their credibility, and the relevance of information. It is possible for both professors and books to be correct, and reconciling their differences can be achieved through critical thinking and seeking additional perspectives. Discrepancies between professors and books in scientific fields are not uncommon due to the constantly evolving nature of science.

Feb 15, 2017

ATY

So, I got a question about stationary field.
In the lecture the professor said, that our field is stationary, so we have [itex]\frac{du}{dt}=0[/itex], but from what I read in books, it only means, that [itex]\frac{\partial u}{\partial t} =0[/itex]. Who is right and why ?

Physics news on Phys.org

Feb 15, 2017

Orodruin

Staff Emeritus

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

Insights Author

Gold Member

The total derivative makes no sense unless you have a function of ##t## only. A stationary field is a field that does not depend on ##t## and therefore ##\partial_t u = 0##.

FAQ: Stationary Field: Why Professor and Books Differ

Why do professors and books differ in their understanding of stationary field?

There can be several reasons for the differences between professors and books when it comes to stationary field. One common reason is that professors may have their own interpretations or perspectives on the subject matter, while books may follow a more standardized or traditional approach. Additionally, books may be outdated and not reflect the most current research and findings in the field, whereas professors may incorporate the latest information into their teachings.

How can I determine which source is more accurate?

It is important to consider multiple sources and evaluate the credibility and reliability of each. Look for sources that are peer-reviewed or written by experts in the field. Additionally, consider the date of publication and if the information is still relevant and up-to-date. Consulting with multiple professors and seeking their opinions can also help in determining the accuracy of information.

Can both professors and books be correct in their understanding of stationary field?

Yes, it is possible for both professors and books to be correct in their understanding of stationary field. As mentioned before, there can be different interpretations and perspectives on the subject, and both sources can provide valuable insights and information. It is important to consider the context and approach of each source.

How can I reconcile the differences between professors and books on this topic?

One way to reconcile the differences between professors and books on the topic of stationary field is to engage in critical thinking and analysis. This involves evaluating both sources and considering the evidence and arguments presented. It can also be helpful to seek out additional resources and perspectives to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the topic.

Is it common for there to be discrepancies between professors and books in scientific fields?

Yes, it is not uncommon to find discrepancies between professors and books in scientific fields. This can be due to the ever-evolving nature of science and the fact that new research and findings are constantly emerging. It is important to stay updated and open-minded when it comes to scientific knowledge and understanding.