Re: B and electric charge

[Ludwik Kowalski <kowalskiL@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU>]

Ludwik Kowalski wrote:

> What I would like to discuss is the definition of B.
> Why do we define it in terms of the EFFECT of the
> magnetic field and not in terms of what CAUSES it?
> Instead of introducing B via the Lorentz law (directly
> or indirectly) we can introduce it via the Bio Savart
> law. Which way is pedagogically more desirable and
> why? I have no opinion so far.

Actually the question should have been asked differently.
Why do we first show what the field does and then how
it is produced? In other words, why Lorentz first and
Biot-Savatr later? Would the reversal be desirable or not?
The formal introduction of B should match the conceptual
sequence chosen, as it does in most textbooks.
Ludwik Kowalski