Re: Displacement Current Revisited

• To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
• Subject: Re: Displacement Current Revisited
• From: David Trimmell <davidt-at-pond-dot-net> (by way of Terry Fritz <twf-at-verinet-dot-com>)
• Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 16:56:04 -0700
• Approved: twf-at-verinet-dot-com

Isn't string theory a bit controversial? I personally have found it to be a
fascinating theory, but didn't think it was widely excepted. This thread is
a bit on the edge for this list, but interesting nevertheless. What ever
happened to a newsgroup location for discussing the more off topic threads?

Regards,

David Trimmell 


<<<< String theory probably will get rejected unless someone can really tie it
well to Tesla coiling.  The two Usenet groups "alt.mad.science" and
"alt.sci.amateur" are there but a bit "slow". - Terry >>>>

At 04:39 PM 3/18/1999 , you wrote:
>Original Poster: "Dr. Resonance" <Dr.Resonance-at-next-wave-dot-net> 
>
>to: John, et al
>
>To really understand displacement currents you have to go beyond classical
>electrodynamics.  You need to study string theory.  The bad news is the math
>is all 2nd order differentials and beyond the scope of many readers of this
>list (certainly not all).  Trying to hash this out in classical
>electrodynamics is really wasting your time.  Not trying to be negative here
>at all --- just stating the facts as I know them to be.   When I was a
>student I made the same mistake of trying to understand field theory with
>classical electrodynamics and only later realized my folly.
>
>Regards,
>
>Dr.Resonance-at-next-wave-dot-net
>

• Prev: Re: Two Papers
• Next: Re: Capacitor Container Failure
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread