This paper looks a bit sketchy.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Menaus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bit Paper
AI Thread Summary
The paper "Instantaneous Interaction between Charged Particles" by Wolfgang Engelhardt raises concerns regarding its adherence to Special Relativity and the quality of its peer review process. Critics argue that the paper's claims about Maxwell's equations and instantaneous force propagation are likely incorrect and poorly articulated. The equations presented do not conform to standard wave equations, complicating the interpretation of electromagnetic wave propagation. Additionally, the examples provided do not substantiate the author's assertions, as they misinterpret the nature of fields in relation to charge and current distributions. Overall, the paper lacks credibility, particularly due to its reliance on unverified experimental evidence.
Menaus
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0511172v2

"Instantaneous Interaction between Charged Particles" by Wolfgang Engelhardt

Submitted to Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie

Has this paper undergone a good process of peer review? It seems in violation of Special Relativity.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Even if it does get published, I wouldn't call the Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie a research journal. As it stands, I think this article doesn't meet the criteria for discussion on PF.
 
The paper is careless in its exposition. The idea that Maxwell's equations and conservation of energy require instantaneous propagation of force is most probably wrong.

The equations in (1) are not standard wave equations with charge and current source terms, but instead some part of the field is used as a source. Then the source is distributed in the whole space and this precludes simple interpretation of ##E_w## as EM wave propagating with speed ##c## from charged body.

The examples with the charge and current loop do not support author's claim in any way. The field is often treated as instantaneous function of charge and current distribution not because the field propagates instantaneously, but because the difference from the correct retarded field is negligible for slowly oscillating currents.
 
Hmmm... This article cites a paper as experimental evidence.

"Experimental Evidence on Non-Applicability of the Standard Retardation Condition to Bound Magnetic Fields and on New Generalized Biot-Savart Law"

http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0601084

I has not been published by anyone.

This is a larger one, i'll have to look at it later.
 
Thread ''splain this hydrostatic paradox in tiny words'
This is (ostensibly) not a trick shot or video*. The scale was balanced before any blue water was added. 550mL of blue water was added to the left side. only 60mL of water needed to be added to the right side to re-balance the scale. Apparently, the scale will balance when the height of the two columns is equal. The left side of the scale only feels the weight of the column above the lower "tail" of the funnel (i.e. 60mL). So where does the weight of the remaining (550-60=) 490mL go...
Consider an extremely long and perfectly calibrated scale. A car with a mass of 1000 kg is placed on it, and the scale registers this weight accurately. Now, suppose the car begins to move, reaching very high speeds. Neglecting air resistance and rolling friction, if the car attains, for example, a velocity of 500 km/h, will the scale still indicate a weight corresponding to 1000 kg, or will the measured value decrease as a result of the motion? In a second scenario, imagine a person with a...
Scalar and vector potentials in Coulomb gauge Assume Coulomb gauge so that $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A}=0.\tag{1}$$ The scalar potential ##\phi## is described by Poisson's equation $$\nabla^2 \phi = -\frac{\rho}{\varepsilon_0}\tag{2}$$ which has the instantaneous general solution given by $$\phi(\mathbf{r},t)=\frac{1}{4\pi\varepsilon_0}\int \frac{\rho(\mathbf{r}',t)}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r}'|}d^3r'.\tag{3}$$ In Coulomb gauge the vector potential ##\mathbf{A}## is given by...
Back
Top