SkipCaptcha
710
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 270:
Line 270: + +
no edit summary
::::I think the contemporary meaning of "field theory" requires a force field (waves or particles or GR), and so I question whether classical gravity, with its action-at-a-distance, qualifies under contemporary usage.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:54, 1 November 2009 (EST)
::::I think the contemporary meaning of "field theory" requires a force field (waves or particles or GR), and so I question whether classical gravity, with its action-at-a-distance, qualifies under contemporary usage.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:54, 1 November 2009 (EST)
:::::That's quite possible, I don't know much about contemporary usage patterns. Even so, I think that presenting these as "classical field theories" could go a long way in clarifying the comments about the other field theories in the article (since they're much easier to understand), even if we don't want to include these as field theories proper. We can include some material on the differences to clarify this point. --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 00:42, 2 November 2009 (EST)