0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I still can't see how c is invariant from a pure intuitive point of view.
The fact that light is a wave is sufficient to make it invariant?
I still can't see how c is invariant from a pure intuitive point of view. The fact that light is a wave is sufficient to make it invariant?Or there is still something else required?The speed of light does not depend on the speed of the source that generate it. Is the same true for sound wave (just because they are wave?)
.. and looking back into Maxwell's equations with this knowledge it can then be seen that magnetism comes from the action of relativistic effects on the electric field together with motion through space/time.
In a magnet, electrons are moving to generate magnetism.
If you could examine an electron sitting there in front of you, you would say it had an electric field. If you could examine an electron that was moving past you, you would say it had a magnetic field too. If you chased after the electron and caught up with it so that you were both moving along together, you would say it only had an electric field again.
Is the invariance of the speed of light with SR and its finite value a requirement in order to have electric and magnetic fields as above described (the magnetic effect is due to relative motion)?
QuoteIn a magnet, electrons are moving to generate magnetism.So if the electrons would had moved according to Galilei relativity, there would had been no magnetism? Is it that true?
Sorry lightarrow, but I don't think it's to do with length contraction. You see an electromagnetic field as an electric field when you have no relative motion, and as a magnetic field when you do. It's the Lorentz force law rather than Lorentz contraction, see ...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please
REGISTER or LOGINhttp://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=14958.0http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=26025.0