[Phys-L] Re: Definition of electric field

[John Clement <clement@HAL-PC.ORG>]

But of course ALL concepts are inventions of our minds.  Force, mass,
fields, atoms ... are all inventions of our minds.  Cavemen probably
recognized forces in an Aristotelian way.  What if we possessed a magnetic
field sensor in the way that some birds have one.  Would we then say that a
magnetic field is real, but other fields are not?  If something can be
described, measured, used to predict results, does it exist?  Do Quarks
exist, or are they just convenient fictions that allow us to explain
results?  If fields do not exist as things, then one can equally well say
that forces do not exist, because they are also constructs which we can use
to predict results.  One can say that existence is in the eye of the
beholder.  I post to this list therefore I exist.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX

> >    *) from a purely technical point of view, not
> >     nearly as important as it might seem, for the
> >     following reason:  At the end of the day, the
> >     electromagnetic field is what it is;  it does
> >     what it does.  A caveman can build a fire that
> >     radiates electromagnetic fields, without needing
> >     to "define" the field.  Definitions have to do
> >     with how _we_ think about the field, whereas the
> >     field exists whether we think about it or not.
>
> Oh my, Folks, the "field" does NOT "exist" -- It is an INVENTION.  There
> was no field for cavemen as they had not yet invented one. Forces existed
> -- even without recognizing them but not "fields."  It looks as if we are
> off on another field trip (oops) to reify another concept.
_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu
https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l