Quantum Query

[El_Machinae]

Exactly. That's why they would disappear. It's not like what happens to a planet when it stops spinning, but more what happens to a tornado when it stops spinning.

 

[betazed]

@El_mac, @perf: Think of it this way.

There is no em field. There are only particles.

The proton or the electron do not create a em field. Rather they have the ability to create and absorb virtual photons which can be exchanged with other protons and electrons and which provide the illusion of interaction thru a field when there is in reality only interaction between particles.

The illusion is so complete that it is almost real.

If there was only one proton in the universe there would be no em field (illusory or otherwise).

 

[warpus]

Exactly. That's why they would disappear. It's not like what happens to a planet when it stops spinning, but more what happens to a tornado when it stops spinning.

Yeah, but elementary particles don't even spin, so they can't stop spinning.

 

[Perfection]

I don't think it's merely due to their existence, but their existence plus their movement.

Nope take a positive charge and a negative charge, stick 'em in space even if they're not moving thy still exist a force on each other

We see this easily with an electromagnet. There are electrons in the wire already, but moving them causes the field to expand enough to pick up cars.

Movement is requred for a magnetic field, but not an electromagnetic field, there's a difference

If the proton still has a field, I would posit that's because the proton is still moving (i.e., spinning). So, if the field disappeared, it would be because the proton stopped spinning. And ... what happens when a proton stops spinning?

Electrons never stop spinning. They always have a fundamental amount of angular momentum. Protons are composite particles, so it's more complex but the theory is the same. They always have a fundamental magnetic dipole moment.

 

[El_Machinae]

If there was only one proton in the universe there would be no em field (illusory or otherwise).

That seems obvious to me. Except that as soon as you tried to detect one, you'd find one. What's a "famous scientist name" for 'by detecting it, you cause it'?

 

[El_Machinae]

Nope take a positive charge and a negative charge, stick 'em in space even if they're not moving thy still exist a force on each other

Wouldn't this be an electric field?

 

[Perfection]

@El_mac, @perf: Think of it this way.

There is no em field. There are only particles.

The proton or the electron do not create a em field. Rather they have the ability to create and absorb virtual photons which can be exchanged with other protons and electrons and which provide the illusion of interaction thru a field when there is in reality only interaction between particles.

The illusion is so complete that it is almost real.

If there was only one proton in the universe there would be no em field (illusory or otherwise).

Yeah, that's the trouble with quantum mechanics, so damn many ways to look at it all.

Yeah, but elementary particles don't even spin, so they can't stop spinning.

Elementary particles spin. There's a fundamental angular momentum for every particle.

 

[Perfection]

Wouldn't this be an electric field?

Electric fields are electromagnetic fields.

 

[betazed]

Wouldn't this be an electric field?

Well, if you are talking about fields then it only makes sense to talk about a electromagnetic field instead of a electric field or a magnetic field. This is because they are really different faces of the same thing looked at differently.

What you might see as a electric field I might see as a magnetic field just because I am moving differently. {Think what you would see if you moved along with an electron in a copper wire and what you would see if you did not. }

 

[El_Machinae]

Okay, if I separate a hydrogen from its electron and hold them a meter apart I'll create a field.

If I put an electron into this field, it will move.

If I put a 'platonic' magnet into this field ... you're saying it will move?

 

[Perfection]

The hell is a 'platonic' magnet?

 

[El_Machinae]

A magnet that didn't contain discrete atoms, etc, merely a magnetic field. Ah ... nevermind.

Anyway, Betazed agrees with me.

If there was only one proton in the universe there would be no em field (illusory or otherwise).

This agrees with my statement that the proton would leave our 3D universe for a new arrangement (where it was the sole mass)

 

[warpus]

Elementary particles spin. There's a fundamental angular momentum for every particle.

But they don't actually spin in the traditional sense, right? I remember reading that somewhere.

 

[Souron]

Particles generate EM feilds. You cannot have the particles without the feilds.

The particles can disapear, but the feilds would go with them. Of cource new feilds would arise becouse of other partilces, and certain Uncertainty Principle rules.

 

[Perfection]

A magnet that didn't contain discrete atoms, etc, merely a magnetic field. Ah ... nevermind.

Oh, so just an idealized magnet. There'd be no movement. Neither fields would interact without movement

Anyway, Betazed agrees with me.

Methinkgs that's putting words into Betazed's mouth

This agrees with my statement that the proton would leave our 3D universe for a new arrangement (where it was the sole mass)

And just how would this happen? And what would the difference from our perspective if the absent proton did or didn't maintain an EM field?

And remember this is about an entire atom dissearing not a proton.

@Betazed, I'm not sure if what you are saying would hold true for a proton, it being a collection of charged particles, maybe it would only be an electron thing.

 

[betazed]

@Betazed, I'm not sure if what you are saying would hold true for a proton, it being a collection of charged particles, maybe it would only be an electron thing.

You maybe right about that (the quarks that make up the proton should also interact with virtual photons); so electron is a better example.

 

[Perfection]

But they don't actually spin in the traditional sense, right? I remember reading that somewhere.

Yeah, the spin in thier own bizzare sense. But it's still spin

Particles generate EM feilds. You cannot have the particles without the feilds.

Sure you can, there are plenty of particles that don't interect with EM. Like Nuetrinos

The particles can disapear, but the feilds would go with them. Of cource new feilds would arise becouse of other partilces, and certain Uncertainty Principle rules.

Well that's the thing, the uncertainty principle rules, and a non-virtual particle disappearing permanently violates that. If that could happen then ΔE*ΔT would be infinite.

 

[El_Machinae]

Oh, so just an idealized magnet. There'd be no movement. Neither fields would interact without movement

And remember this is about an entire atom dissearing not a proton.

Yeah, "Platonic" tends to mean "idealised", in a sense. But, you'd agree that a magnet in a charged field would not move, but an electron would. Ergo, that's a way, metaphorically, to distinguish between between an electric field and a electro-magnetic field.

Warpus, at the atomic level it all looks like mathematics to me. I honestly just imagine formulas swirling around, interacting with other formulas. It's quite pathetic.

Erm. I guess the OP wants the proton AND the electon to lose their field. Erg. That's tough. The electron would need to stop spinning and disappear to another 3D arrangement (outside our 3D, and the proton's).

 

[Perfection]

Yeah, "Platonic" tends to mean "idealised", in a sense. But, you'd agree that a magnet in a charged field would not move, but an electron would. Ergo, that's a way, metaphorically, to distinguish between between an electric field and a electro-magnetic field.

No, you've distinguished between a magnet and a charge, which is quite a bit different from distinguishing thier fields. If you were to change the reference frame to a different view of motion what is electric field and what is magnetic field changes with it.

E@M are really two sides of the same coin.

 

[betazed]

E@M are really two sides of the same coin.

and that coin is called F The electro-magnetic field tensor (or more correctly the electro-magnetic field 2-form)