Re: Free D/L The Electromagnetic Field Theory Textbook Project

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "pjj by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <jjenkins-at-satx.rr-dot-com>

i have one comment

"HUH!?!?!"

lol
PAul


----- Original Message -----
From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
To: <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 5:25 PM
Subject: RE: Free D/L The Electromagnetic Field Theory Textbook Project


> Original poster: "Loudner, Godfrey by way of Terry Fritz
<twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <gloudner-at-SINTE.EDU>
>
> The textbook certainty takes a high flying approach. One would have to
have
> a background in classical mechanics from the likes of Goldstein's famous
> book on classical mechanics to understand the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian
> formulations of electromagnetic fields. The relativistic invariance of
> Maxwell's field equations is also treated. These are excellent topics if
one
> is aiming to study quantum field theory. The mathematics of quantum fields
> is phony, but somehow physicists are able to extract correct physical
> predictions. The mathematics of electromagnetic fields is charming indeed,
> but what I find difficult to follow is the physical significance of the
> equations. I find it difficult to sit down and apply Maxwell's equations
to
> electromagnetic situations. Even if one succeeds in setting up the correct
> equations, the resulting boundary value problems are too difficult to
solve.
> One has to make simplifying physical assumptions that don't affect too
much
> what you are trying to study to bring the problem into the realm of known
> mathematical techniques. It seems to me that the successful users of
> electromagnetic theory are those who know the art of making the right
> simplifying assumptions. My physical intuition is low, so I have a great
> problem in making simplifying assumptions. When I attack physical
problems,
> I have to include everything I can think of into the equations, and hope
for
> the best on the mathematics. This approach usually leads to extremely
> difficult mathematical questions. For those of us who are already in
command
> of the necessary mathematics, I wish someone would write a book that
> constantly addresses the physical significance of the equations and the
art
> of making simplifying physical assumptions. Books will say, " we leave
that
> term out of the equation because it does not affect what we want to find
> out." I say, "put that term back in because you did not tell me the
physical
> reasons why it has little effect."
>
> Godfrey Loudner
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tesla list [SMTP:tesla-at-pupman-dot-com]
> > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 7:48 PM
> > To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> > Subject: Re: Free D/L The Electromagnetic Field Theory Textbook
> > Project
> >
> > Original poster: "by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>"
> > <Parpp807-at-aol-dot-com>
> >
> > Bart and Matthew,
> >
> > I tried the URL again, and again it failed to work for me.
> > This time I went drectly to Uppsala University. There is a link that
will
> > take you directly to the textbook. Looks like a lot of other good stuff
> > available there.
> > Thanks for the help.
> >
> > http://www.plasma.uu.se/CED/Book/
> >
> > cheers,
> > Ralph Zekelman
> >
> >
>
>
>