Sean Carroll

What mechanism, for lack of a better term, makes this so? Again, this is a question that the satisfactoriness of the answer is going to depend on your prior exposure to physics. Let me give you the highest level answer right away, which is that according to the theory of relativity, the electric and magnetic fields are just two different aspects of the same underlying field.

Exactly in the same way, not exactly exactly, but very, very analogous to how time and space are two different aspects of the same underlying space-time. The electric field and the magnetic field are two different aspects of the underlying electromagnetic field, if you want to put it that way. Very, very roughly, the sort of spatial components are the magnetic field.

Exactly in the same way, not exactly exactly, but very, very analogous to how time and space are two different aspects of the same underlying space-time. The electric field and the magnetic field are two different aspects of the underlying electromagnetic field, if you want to put it that way. Very, very roughly, the sort of spatial components are the magnetic field.

The temporal, time-like components are the electric field. But that's not exactly right, but it has something to do with it. The point is that when you do a Lorentz transformation—

The temporal, time-like components are the electric field. But that's not exactly right, but it has something to do with it. The point is that when you do a Lorentz transformation—

which is to say, if you go from one reference frame, like we were just talking about with the large object, you go from one reference frame to another, which you can do by either moving yourself or by moving the magnet or the charged particle or some other electromagnetic phenomenon. Either you move it or you move you, it doesn't matter.

which is to say, if you go from one reference frame, like we were just talking about with the large object, you go from one reference frame to another, which you can do by either moving yourself or by moving the magnet or the charged particle or some other electromagnetic phenomenon. Either you move it or you move you, it doesn't matter.

You are now shifting, rotating the different parts of the electromagnetic field into each other so that... Exactly for the same reason why moving at a constant velocity means that you define the division of spacetime into time and space slightly differently than a person who is not moving in the original reference frame.

You are now shifting, rotating the different parts of the electromagnetic field into each other so that... Exactly for the same reason why moving at a constant velocity means that you define the division of spacetime into time and space slightly differently than a person who is not moving in the original reference frame.

Now you also define what part of the electromagnetic field is electric and what part of it is magnetic slightly differently. So this was a crucial feature of, of course, the empirical, the historical development of relativity. It was first these wonderful experiments done in the mid-1800s that culminated in Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism that showed that

Now you also define what part of the electromagnetic field is electric and what part of it is magnetic slightly differently. So this was a crucial feature of, of course, the empirical, the historical development of relativity. It was first these wonderful experiments done in the mid-1800s that culminated in Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism that showed that

that empirically you could make an electric field by moving a magnet and vice versa, that eventually led to different transformation laws, Lorentz and Fitzgerald and so forth, and Poincare, and Einstein eventually unifying the whole bit.

that empirically you could make an electric field by moving a magnet and vice versa, that eventually led to different transformation laws, Lorentz and Fitzgerald and so forth, and Poincare, and Einstein eventually unifying the whole bit.

So the very short answer is the electric magnetic fields are two different aspects of the same single underlying electromagnetic field, and they are transformed into each other by changing your frame of reference.

So the very short answer is the electric magnetic fields are two different aspects of the same single underlying electromagnetic field, and they are transformed into each other by changing your frame of reference.

Alex West says, with the general release of AI, have you noticed any fluctuations or trends in both the quality and quantity of peer-reviewed papers and more personally emails from the next Einsteins? Well, that's a good question. For peer-reviewed papers, no, I certainly have not.

Alex West says, with the general release of AI, have you noticed any fluctuations or trends in both the quality and quantity of peer-reviewed papers and more personally emails from the next Einsteins? Well, that's a good question. For peer-reviewed papers, no, I certainly have not.

It's a weird thing to me because in my kind of field, the most active people, you know, the people who are most respected in the field basically know each other, and you know what people are doing, and you recognize their names when they write papers, and people write a few papers a year. Some are more prolific than others.

It's a weird thing to me because in my kind of field, the most active people, you know, the people who are most respected in the field basically know each other, and you know what people are doing, and you recognize their names when they write papers, and people write a few papers a year. Some are more prolific than others.

But there are these other fields where apparently there exist people who just write, I don't know, 100 papers a year, which is essentially impossible. It's not the field's fault because that's not typical in that field, but you can get away with doing that. I can't even read 100 papers a year. But obviously there's a lot of churn here.