Re: challenge question ..
amraldo,
1. yes, absolutely agree. if it can not be created or destroyed, how then is the electron producing its E-field continuously? it must be getting its energy from somewhere...
2. no. we can measure the effect (the produced & emitted e-field) but we have no way to measure what was "before" i.e. the input. for now, we are conjecturing that there MUST be an input due to your point # 1.
probably answering this question is akin to answering what was before the creation of the universe. agreed, most difficult question. how could one know when such events occur so far apart in time (10bazzilion years ago or something rediculous). but we need not get side tracked, we have electrons in existance RIGHT NOW. we can study the cause & effect RIGHT NOW. that is the difference.
tkbits,
it is difficult because in reality that "body in motion" who is maintaining its motion eventually comes to a stop. why? because in reality it is continuously interracting with its environment, for example, moving through air. well, air has resistance so, eventually the "body in motion" comes to a rest. unless it provides its own energy (burns fuel in classic newtonion motion) or 3rd party applies energy to the "body in motion". there are in fact cercumstances in which you could create an environment that doesn't have resistance, or very very minimal. lets take the example of a circuit who's closed loop path exists in a superconductivity state. once you impart energy to get the electrons moving through the circuit they will stay in motion (looping around & around the circuit) for millions of years ... probably for longer than the expected life of our solar system. the energy that keeps the temperature low is NOT part of the system and is a seperate issue. but in fact, you have electrons whos "body in motion" IS staying in motion virtually forever. hey... a PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE and it is real and it has been proven to work!! here is the rub. those electrons are not allowed to perform work, for if they do, they will expel energy and the "body in motion" will meet a resistance and come to a stop. (but who ever said that perpetual motion machines had to perform useful work!??).
so indeed you raise a good point. we need to consider the electrons not in a perfect non-resistance non-interracting environment as was our beggining conversation. now we understand that in REALITY they ARE interracting & they do perform work. and yet... the efield remains unchanged. it does not diminish. now this is a startling concept.
both of you have made real progress in this discussion. this is about the limit of my knowledge on the subject (theoretically). i hope i have presented an interesting enough arguement that will keep you focused on what is really at work here. remember these concepts --> cause & effect, observed & non-observed.
Mr.Cool
Added after 10 minutes:
the great physicist Fenymen once wrote on the definition of fields & energy. he came to the conclusion that he has no idea what they are only that they "are".
Paladin, agreed you do not need energy input to maintain a field. BUT.. this is only true if that field is existing in an envornment where it does NOT interract with anything. this is an impossible situation in reality so your arguement holds only in the theoretical world.
in reality those electrons are in motion. going here, going there. they carry charge, a MOVING charge. they add/subtract with other fields, they form back-emf due to lenz law. they see resistances to circuits, they cause resistances to circuits. all of these activities will force the efield to be diminished, or should cause the E-field to be diminished. yet... it is not. that is my point.
Mr.Cool