Re: [Phys-l] Electromagnetic waves

[Bernard Cleyet <bernardcleyet@redshift.com>]

I've mentioned before (elsewhere?) that a century ago physical models (mass, springs, dashpots) were used to "explain" electrical ones -- now it's reversed. (cap., inductance, resistance).

bc  who on commenting to Bob Eisberg on the similarity of alpha decay and frustrated total internal reflection, heard his reply, "A wave is a wave is a wave."


On 2010, Feb 28, , at 14:23, Bob Sciamanda wrote:

> Earlier I wrote:
> > Point out the simpler example of the damped oscillation equation, which
> > applies to both the mass on a damped spring and to the RLC circuit.
>
> Our understanding and our teaching are greatly enhanced by appreciating and 
> emphasizing such mathematical models which happen to apply to several 
> otherwise disparate physical phenomena.  However there is a grave danger in 
> not emphasizing that in most of these cases the commonality is purely 
> mathematical - the physical concepts and processes are usually completely 
> disparate in the several different phenomena which happen to share a common 
> form of mathematics.   There exists the danger of extrapolating the 
> mathematical commonality to include a conceptual and/or physical identity. 
> This extrapolation may begin as only a subconsious suggestion which , if not 
> explicitly confronted, can later wreak conceptual havoc.
>
> I am reminded of a quote from Freeman Dyson (poorly paraphrased from 
> memory):
> "I have great respect for Stephen Hawking, but he often confuses a 
> mathematical model with the represented reality."