Well done if you bought a first edition-it'll be worth a mint one day*-but I wasn't happy with how I explained (some of what happens in) quantum mechanics. So I had another go. It's waaaaaaay better. And the pictures are prettier: https://willijbouwman.blogspot.co.uk
*Polo.
New and improved-Quantum Mechanics.
Re: New and improved-Quantum Mechanics.
Great work again, William.uwot wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2018 5:34 pm Well done if you bought a first edition-it'll be worth a mint one day*-but I wasn't happy with how I explained (some of what happens in) quantum mechanics. So I had another go. It's waaaaaaay better. And the pictures are prettier: https://willijbouwman.blogspot.co.uk
*Polo.
A thought: It's not just quanta that's a focal point surrounded by its effects/waves, everything is.
Re: New and improved-Quantum Mechanics.
Thank you.Greta wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2018 9:48 pmGreat work again, William.uwot wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2018 5:34 pm Well done if you bought a first edition-it'll be worth a mint one day*-but I wasn't happy with how I explained (some of what happens in) quantum mechanics. So I had another go. It's waaaaaaay better. And the pictures are prettier: https://willijbouwman.blogspot.co.uk
*Polo.
Yeah, but you try drawing that!
-
- Posts: 4331
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: New and improved-Quantum Mechanics.
spirograph
the brick throwing bit was pleasant too...
-Imp
the brick throwing bit was pleasant too...
-Imp
Re: New and improved-Quantum Mechanics.
I thought that was the kind of thing you were drawing in some of the panels from "... and every spark of every spark" onwards.
It would probably more graphically be illustrated as an object cycling through itself over time, such as a tesseract or hypersphere, with the practical effect that the most concentrated and stable stuff lies in the middle and the most ephemeral parts towards the edges where there is the most activity, although even a video would be limited in this by being a four dimensions represented as three on a two dimensional plane. Maybe one of those things where "you have to be there"?
I am interested in the similarities between atoms and stars. In each case you have this insanely dense and intense entity surrounded by much larger vast fields of effects within relatively vast tracts of space. It seems that the universe's sophistication increases as it cools and its homogeneity decreases, with ever more fractal hierarchies formed.
Re: New and improved-Quantum Mechanics.
That's right, Impenitent; something for everyone.Impenitent wrote: ↑Sun Jan 28, 2018 12:41 am spirograph
the brick throwing bit was pleasant too...
-Imp
Re: New and improved-Quantum Mechanics.
I hadn't thought of it like that, but now that you mention it, I suppose it is possible that any one of the original sparks could be considered the source of a 'bubble' that develops into it's own 'universe', resulting in a 'multiverse'. At a push, it might be that every quantum event has the same potential and some version of 'many worlds' is true.
Could be.Greta wrote: ↑Sun Jan 28, 2018 9:19 amIt would probably more graphically be illustrated as an object cycling through itself over time, such as a tesseract or hypersphere, with the practical effect that the most concentrated and stable stuff lies in the middle and the most ephemeral parts towards the edges where there is the most activity, although even a video would be limited in this by being a four dimensions represented as three on a two dimensional plane. Maybe one of those things where "you have to be there"?
Well, one difference is that the orbits and rotation of planets, solar systems and most galaxies is restricted to a plane; in effect 2D. Whereas atoms are buzzing about in 3D, and possibly more, if such things exist.Greta wrote: ↑Sun Jan 28, 2018 9:19 amI am interested in the similarities between atoms and stars. In each case you have this insanely dense and intense entity surrounded by much larger vast fields of effects within relatively vast tracts of space. It seems that the universe's sophistication increases as it cools and its homogeneity decreases, with ever more fractal hierarchies formed.
Re: New and improved-Quantum Mechanics.
I hadn't thought of it like that (there's an echo echo echo) ... not as little universes. Just that I saw a number of drawings that seemed to express the concept of a central concentrated area surrounded by fields.uwot wrote: ↑Tue Jan 30, 2018 9:20 amI hadn't thought of it like that, but now that you mention it, I suppose it is possible that any one of the original sparks could be considered the source of a 'bubble' that develops into it's own 'universe', resulting in a 'multiverse'. At a push, it might be that every quantum event has the same potential and some version of 'many worlds' is true.
The idea really set you aflame, didn't it?uwot wrote:Could be.Greta wrote: ↑Sun Jan 28, 2018 9:19 amIt would probably more graphically be illustrated as an object cycling through itself over time, such as a tesseract or hypersphere, with the practical effect that the most concentrated and stable stuff lies in the middle and the most ephemeral parts towards the edges where there is the most activity, although even a video would be limited in this by being a four dimensions represented as three on a two dimensional plane. Maybe one of those things where "you have to be there"?
Then again, a star is a dense entity and its surrounding effects are the planets, moons, asteroids, comets, dust and various fields that extend beyond the Oort cloud. meanwhile, an atomic nucleus is also a dense area surrounded by its effects, in this case electrons and, I'm no expert on this, but at least field of the SNF. Here both planets (asteroids, dust etc) and electrons are thought of as mere effects of their central star/nucleus. This is based on the fact that the Sun contains 99% of the mass of the entire solar system and an atomic nucleus's percentage of an atom's mass is of a similar ilk, 99.9% or so.uwot wrote:Well, one difference is that the orbits and rotation of planets, solar systems and most galaxies is restricted to a plane; in effect 2D. Whereas atoms are buzzing about in 3D, and possibly more, if such things exist.Greta wrote: ↑Sun Jan 28, 2018 9:19 amI am interested in the similarities between atoms and stars. In each case you have this insanely dense and intense entity surrounded by much larger vast fields of effects within relatively vast tracts of space. It seems that the universe's sophistication increases as it cools and its homogeneity decreases, with ever more fractal hierarchies formed.
There's differences in the detail, as you noted, but also consider different sub-systems, for instance local stellar neighbourhoods may be more significant than we know. Also note that Milkromeda is predicted to end up as an elliptical galaxy.