Jump to content

Talk:Electric potential energy: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
SineBot (talk | contribs)
m Signing comment by 69.140.28.26 - "hi: new section"
RGForbes (talk | contribs)
m Spuria removed
Line 1: Line 1:
{{physics|class=Start|importance=High}}
{{physics|class=Start|importance=High}}


electric energy is a electricity of people of america bye <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/190.200.138.98|190.200.138.98]] ([[User talk:190.200.138.98|talk]]) 22:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Negative Stored Energy in QM? ==

I find the last paragraph of the section on Stored Energy to be a bit misleading. The fact is that two oppositely charged particles held in close proximity will have less energy than two oppositely charge particles held infinitely far apart. However, both energies are formally infinite for point particles. This has nothing to do with quantum mechanics. Defining a single charged point particle to have zero energy is the quantum mechanics, and is a good introduction to the idea of renormalization. If such a paragraph were included, it would be nice to point out such subtleties, rather than cloud matters by saying the previous equation isn't true.


== Negative Stored Energy in QM? ==
== Negative Stored Energy in QM? ==
Line 12: Line 5:
I find the last paragraph of the section on Stored Energy to be a bit misleading. The fact is that two oppositely charged particles held in close proximity will have less energy than two oppositely charge particles held infinitely far apart. However, both energies are formally infinite for point particles. This has nothing to do with quantum mechanics. Defining a single charged point particle to have zero energy is the quantum mechanics, and is a good introduction to the idea of renormalization. If such a paragraph were included, it would be nice to point out such subtleties, rather than cloud matters by saying the previous equation isn't true.
I find the last paragraph of the section on Stored Energy to be a bit misleading. The fact is that two oppositely charged particles held in close proximity will have less energy than two oppositely charge particles held infinitely far apart. However, both energies are formally infinite for point particles. This has nothing to do with quantum mechanics. Defining a single charged point particle to have zero energy is the quantum mechanics, and is a good introduction to the idea of renormalization. If such a paragraph were included, it would be nice to point out such subtleties, rather than cloud matters by saying the previous equation isn't true.
[[Special:Contributions/70.253.79.237|70.253.79.237]] ([[User talk:70.253.79.237|talk]]) 18:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
[[Special:Contributions/70.253.79.237|70.253.79.237]] ([[User talk:70.253.79.237|talk]]) 18:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

== hi ==

hi <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/69.140.28.26|69.140.28.26]] ([[User talk:69.140.28.26|talk]]) 16:15, 18 March 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Revision as of 22:17, 14 April 2009

WikiProject iconPhysics Start‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Negative Stored Energy in QM?

I find the last paragraph of the section on Stored Energy to be a bit misleading. The fact is that two oppositely charged particles held in close proximity will have less energy than two oppositely charge particles held infinitely far apart. However, both energies are formally infinite for point particles. This has nothing to do with quantum mechanics. Defining a single charged point particle to have zero energy is the quantum mechanics, and is a good introduction to the idea of renormalization. If such a paragraph were included, it would be nice to point out such subtleties, rather than cloud matters by saying the previous equation isn't true. 70.253.79.237 (talk) 18:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]