[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In polar coordinates the field has only a single value at a given distance.

That's not correct. In polar coordinates the field is described by three values at every point: the magnitude, and the altitude and azimuth of the direction. If the charge is located at the origin, the latter two will happen to match the alt and azi of the observer. But that doesn't mean they're not needed to describe the field; it just means you can mentally refer to them to the coords of the location and not bother to write them down. If the point doesn't happen to be located at the horizon, then none of the three parameters describing the field will match the coordinates of the observer and it's harder to forget to write them down :-)

To put it another way, if you use the (non-coordinate) unit basis vectors (R, Theta, Phi), you can describe the field as

   (k/r^2) * R

where R is the unit radius vector, and it _looks_ like there's just one parameter. But that's not correct. First, to describe the basis vector "R" you need three parameters (because it varies depending on the location); and second, there are really three params here, but as an artifact of the way you've chosen the coordinates the other two happen to be zero. You've really got

   (k/r^2) * R + 0 * Theta + 0 * Phi

Again, move the charge off the origin and those zeros change to messy functions of the position.


Also, the permeability of space does not apply to the static point charge.

I'm not following you. The permeability of space, which is arguably an artifict of the units chosen (since it pretty much disappears in cgs units), shows up in Maxwell's equations but isn't interesting unless the fields are changing. But I don't see how that relates to the electric field viewed as a scalar field?


Granted, a truly static point charge is purely a mental construct; however, maybe you can see my point. <g>

Of course this thought experiment violates HUP since the proton is *not* in motion.

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen A. Lawrence

The E field is not a scalar field. A scalar field is represented by a single number (magnitude) at each point; the E field is represented by a vector at each point (magnitude _and_ direction -- that requires 3 numbers in 3-space, or 4 numbers in 4-space).
___________________________________________________
Try the New Netscape Mail Today!
Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List
http://mail.netscape.com



Reply via email to