physical units help keep track of the relevant dimensional analysisas long as you aren't a natural units fag, i can at least get along with you
>>16847722Tell me you don't do anything serious without telling me.
>>16847727theoretician thinking he's useful for anything but laughs
>>16847759>Impying frauding measurements so that they fit with a theory you don't understand is useful.
>>16847815when people like you wander into the lab, i ask "are you lost?"
>>16847815>my theories don't work without fraud
>>16847704Neither. Heaviside-Lorentz.Left isn’t even SI, it’s Heaviside-Lorentz (epsilon_0 = 1). Gaussian crap doesn’t generalize to arbitrary dimensions (because guess what, 4pi is the surface area of a unit sphere).
>>16847920Left is SI. There's no epsilon or mu because it's in the D and H already
>>16847986Ah, it’s the wishy-washy displacement vector field that only exists as an approximation and uses bullshit notions line “free charge” and handwavy arguments about polarization to justify it. Sad to see that people are still stuck in ether days.
>>16847990there is no approximation (in the classical sense)D and H are introduced to isolate the most significant term of material multipole response P and Mall the other terms are still there as part of total charge/current that's not the free charge/currentdecomposing out higher order terms should be child's play to a competent theorist
>>16848084The entire concept of polarization is an approximation. Go ahead and solve the Schrödinger equation for anything more complicated than hydrogen.>b-b-but it's classicalDon't remember classical mechanics working for atoms...
>>16848084Oh and btw>there is no approximation>we drop the higher order terms in the perturbation expansionlel lmao
>>16848093Then Maxwell's equations and the Schrödinger equation are approximations by your own standards so you should be complaining about using them too.pedantic fuck
>>16848114>Maxwell's equationsMaxwell's equations in vacuum can be derived entirely from two simple assumptions:1. It's a massless spin 1 field.2. It's linear, ie there are no self-interactions.No need for some bizarre notion of global polarization field somehow manifesting out of microscopic interactions of individual atoms.>Schrödinger equationEquation of motion under the Galilean group. You can do the Wigner-Inonu contraction to derive it from the Klein-Gordon equation.Again, all field equations in vacuum is just you doing group theory shenanigans with the Poincare group. The Poincare group itself is a fancy way of saying "Nature doesn't care from where you observe it". Very barebones and fundamental stuff.
>>16847704It looks like SI is preferable.
>>16847704SI looks good
>>16847704Ok but what is this in planck units
>>16849059the lag
>>16848123>>16848093>>16847990there is nothing wrong with D and Hdoing electrodynamics in media would be a pain in the anus without them
>>16851954It’s not wrong. But there’s nothing fundamental about it either. They’re emergent, macroscopic fields. Zoom in enough and they suddenly don’t make sense.
>>16847920\thread
