Skip to main content
10 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 10, 2017 at 18:15 history edited Wildcat CC BY-SA 3.0
His first link is about the scalar potential not about the potential energy, Changed V to phi. Also no reason to use 1 in the numerator of the fraction. Added link to the Hamiltonian
S Jul 10, 2017 at 17:59 history edited Wildcat CC BY-SA 3.0
His first link is about the scalar potential not about the potential energy, Changed V to phi. Also no reason to use 1 in the numerator of the fraction. Added link to the Hamiltonian
S Jul 10, 2017 at 17:59 history suggested juanrga CC BY-SA 3.0
His first link is about the scalar potential not about the potential energy, Changed V to phi. Also no reason to use 1 in the numerator of the fraction. Added link to the Hamiltonian
Jul 10, 2017 at 17:38 review Suggested edits
S Jul 10, 2017 at 17:59
S Jul 9, 2017 at 15:39 history suggested juanrga CC BY-SA 3.0
minus sign, charge missing, removed remark to magnetic field B because A is also related to electric field E. Also V doesn't have to be electrostatic.
Jul 9, 2017 at 14:49 review Suggested edits
S Jul 9, 2017 at 15:39
Jul 9, 2017 at 0:53 comment added Abhinav Dhawan @Wildcat Thanks a lot. Though I'm not in a position to grasp all that you wrote. But surely some points are clearer to me than before. First, that electrostatic forces are not only between "static" charges but even exist between moving charges . Another point is that there are several other factors like magnetic interactions also have a role to play but they are dominated by electrostatic interactions.
Jul 9, 2017 at 0:48 vote accept Abhinav Dhawan
Jul 9, 2017 at 0:09 comment added hBy2Py Perhaps better to say that the magnetic interactions are treated as a perturbation atop the zero-order solution defined by the electrostatic potential?
Jul 8, 2017 at 23:50 history answered Wildcat CC BY-SA 3.0