Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

• Username
• Password
• Remember me

• Sign in using OpenID
• Remember me

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory internal-categories k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeJun 14th 2023
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexbrief `category:people`-entry for hyperlinking references <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/Walter+Greiner/1">v1</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Walter+Greiner">current</a>

   brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references

   v1, current

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorzskoda
   • CommentTimeJun 14th 2023
   • (edited Jun 14th 2023)
   • PermaLink
   Author: zskoda
   Format: MarkdownItexHe (co)authored great books. But also indulged into dubious influence engineering coauthoring thousand(s) of articles about most of which, according to some of physics colleagues who I spoke to (and who discussed with him in person), he had no scientific clue. He created an institute in Frankfurt where, among the others, some prominent crackpots like El Naschie had affiliation. Greiner largely praised El Naschie, even contributed article(s) to volume in honour of El Naschie together with some other constant supporters (and partial crackpots) like Roessler, Crnjac and Iovane (e.g. in <https://www.gbv.de/dms/goettingen/502968192.pdf> or <https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/chaos-solitons-and-fractals/vol/25/issue/4>) etc. All together a **sad** story when a talented scientific writer who was starting as sound theoretical physicist got too greedy for influence and publication record.

   He (co)authored great books. But also indulged into dubious influence engineering coauthoring thousand(s) of articles about most of which, according to some of physics colleagues who I spoke to (and who discussed with him in person), he had no scientific clue. He created an institute in Frankfurt where, among the others, some prominent crackpots like El Naschie had affiliation. Greiner largely praised El Naschie, even contributed article(s) to volume in honour of El Naschie together with some other constant supporters (and partial crackpots) like Roessler, Crnjac and Iovane (e.g. in https://www.gbv.de/dms/goettingen/502968192.pdf or https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/chaos-solitons-and-fractals/vol/25/issue/4) etc. All together a sad story when a talented scientific writer who was starting as sound theoretical physicist got too greedy for influence and publication record.

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeJun 14th 2023
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItex> He (co)authored great books. Anecdote: The very first time I taught a University class was as a PhD student substituting one week for a professor who went to attend a conference during semester. The course was on electromagnetism, following Greiner's book, so I conscientiously looked through the relevant sections. Eventually I came to the conclusion that the subsequent presentations of the Meissner effect and then of the Aharonov-Bohm effect were using the exact same argument, but still arriving at opposite conclusions. Right now I am in similar disappointment mode: I was trying to dig out good textbook accounts on EM-fields in dielectric media, but come back disappointed from each book I open. Even Jackson and Landau & Lifshitz don't seem to write the clear punchlines that I was hoping to be able to cite > All together a sad story To the extent that you have objective verifiable relevant information for the reader of our wiki, you should feel invited to add it to this entry here.

   He (co)authored great books.

   Anecdote: The very first time I taught a University class was as a PhD student substituting one week for a professor who went to attend a conference during semester. The course was on electromagnetism, following Greiner’s book, so I conscientiously looked through the relevant sections. Eventually I came to the conclusion that the subsequent presentations of the Meissner effect and then of the Aharonov-Bohm effect were using the exact same argument, but still arriving at opposite conclusions.

   Right now I am in similar disappointment mode: I was trying to dig out good textbook accounts on EM-fields in dielectric media, but come back disappointed from each book I open. Even Jackson and Landau & Lifshitz don’t seem to write the clear punchlines that I was hoping to be able to cite

   All together a sad story

   To the extent that you have objective verifiable relevant information for the reader of our wiki, you should feel invited to add it to this entry here.

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorzskoda
   • CommentTimeJun 15th 2023
   • (edited Jun 15th 2023)
   • PermaLink
   Author: zskoda
   Format: MarkdownItex(To Urs, 3) How about * G. Russakoff, _A derivation of the macroscopic Maxwell equations_, American Journal of Physics 38, 1188–1195 (1970) [doi](https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1976000) * O. L. de Lange, R. E. Raab, _Surprises in the multipole description of macroscopic electrodynamics_, American Journal of Physics 74, 301–312 (2006) [doi](https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2151213) The second article also cites the book F. N. H. Robinson, Macroscopic electromagnetism, 1973 as "standard". I have never seen it before.

   (To Urs, 3)

   How about

   • G. Russakoff, A derivation of the macroscopic Maxwell equations, American Journal of Physics 38, 1188–1195 (1970) doi
   • O. L. de Lange, R. E. Raab, Surprises in the multipole description of macroscopic electrodynamics, American Journal of Physics 74, 301–312 (2006) doi

   The second article also cites the book F. N. H. Robinson, Macroscopic electromagnetism, 1973 as “standard”. I have never seen it before.

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeJun 16th 2023
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexThanks, these are good references. I have added them at *[[dielectric medium]]* and at *[[Maxwell's equation]]*

   Thanks, these are good references. I have added them at dielectric medium and at Maxwell’s equation