Opinions on Physics - Puzzles, mysteries, that sort...

How does science work? And what's all this about quantum mechanics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Mike Strand
Posts: 406
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 6:54 am
Location: USA

Re: Opinions on Physics - Puzzles, mysteries, that sort...

Post by Mike Strand » Sat Mar 19, 2011 7:48 pm

Regarding issues in Quantum Theory, I recommend the following two articles from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-measurement/
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-collapse/

Someday there will be a better theory for the world of the very small, and it is hoped the new theory will also resolve and include the issues of relativity theory -- GUT.

My hope is first, that I'll live to see it, and second (just as important), I'll be able to understand it intuitively! Even if I live to see it, however, I have doubts as to whether I'll be able to understand it intuitively. The nice thing about Newton's Laws of Motion -- even if you can't follow the math, it deals with objects and phenomena about which we have daily experience and thus can be grasped intuitively.

By contrast, it appears that even a deep understanding of the math of QM and TR doesn't guarantee an intuitive grasp of them. And I'm not sure that some folks, taking a spiritual or mystical approach to them and claiming intuitive or spiritual insight, really get it.

User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 521
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Opinions on Physics - Puzzles, mysteries, that sort...

Post by Cerveny » Sat Mar 19, 2011 9:54 pm

Mike Strand wrote:Regarding issues in Quantum Theory, I recommend the following two articles from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-measurement/
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-collapse/

Someday there will be a better theory for the world of the very small, and it is hoped the new theory will also resolve and include the issues of relativity theory -- GUT.

My hope is first, that I'll live to see it, and second (just as important), I'll be able to understand it intuitively! Even if I live to see it, however, I have doubts as to whether I'll be able to understand it intuitively. The nice thing about Newton's Laws of Motion -- even if you can't follow the math, it deals with objects and phenomena about which we have daily experience and thus can be grasped intuitively.

By contrast, it appears that even a deep understanding of the math of QM and TR doesn't guarantee an intuitive grasp of them. And I'm not sure that some folks, taking a spiritual or mystical approach to them and claiming intuitive or spiritual insight, really get it.
There is too much mysticism about QM. The thing is to that: The main problem is the point "now". It is the subject of QM in fact. But the (point) "now" is not done yet, there are still some (spectrum of) possibilities only. But after any interaction (measurement) the "now" becomes a history. The "now" is caught by (glued to) the history and creates a new time sediment...

And the (discrete) possibilities? In case we recede from exact knowledge of system's status and consider system status' probabilities only, the simple demand of stable status' probability (|| fi^2||) during interaction (measurement) generates some (discrete) spectrum of main values (of appropriate operator).. The interaction (measurement) must not change system status' probability. After the interaction the (local) "now" ends. And new possibilities are waiting...

:)

User avatar
Aetixintro
Posts: 319
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 7:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Opinions on Physics - Puzzles, mysteries, that sort...

Post by Aetixintro » Sun Mar 20, 2011 11:35 am

Let me remind you that a point is indeed without extension no matter what. Indeed, per definition it is without any dimensions whatsoever!

Thus, as a point in time is "now", it's equally without any extension in the split/distinction between past and future! Conclusion: one is certain in saying that "now" is definitely without any possibility whatsoever! Try to contend me on this!

Cheers! :)

User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 521
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Opinions on Physics - Puzzles, mysteries, that sort...

Post by Cerveny » Sun Mar 20, 2011 10:17 pm

Aetixintro wrote:Let me remind you that a point is indeed without extension no matter what. Indeed, per definition it is without any dimensions whatsoever!

Thus, as a point in time is "now", it's equally without any extension in the split/distinction between past and future! Conclusion: one is certain in saying that "now" is definitely without any possibility whatsoever! Try to contend me on this!

Cheers! :)
There are no points in QM, there is quantum only, some uncertain interval, nobody can see inside. We can not know what is happening there without a measurement, without some interaction. But measurement has a "fatal" impact on a QM system. System looses "freedom", it is to confess "color", it is to "put some card on the table", it is to become a "history", it is to array into causal system. We can not determine status of system without interaction with it. Imagine a neutron, we know about it (from the future) but we can not decide whether it is already decayed without a measurement. After measurement we will know whether is in a new history sediment still neutron or whether was substituted by a proton... The measurement (interaction) moves the Q system from the presence to the history.

The future is other causal phase - the Universe condensates, grows, crystalizes from the future. The point "now" is (alive) surface between these two phases...

User avatar
Aetixintro
Posts: 319
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 7:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Opinions on Physics - Puzzles, mysteries, that sort...

Post by Aetixintro » Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:49 am

Every measurement happens in the present, thus a neutron can't be measured "from the future". And as we measure, the very signal of this measurement still carries with it the present, even though you like to write "the past". Just this. I'm not interested in making points/"points" in this for the time being. (Also, partly, because of limited knowledge of (absurd) "thoughts"/thoughts on QM or what is the consensus or best view on QM now!

Cheers! :)

User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 521
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Opinions on Physics - Puzzles, mysteries, that sort...

Post by Cerveny » Tue Mar 22, 2011 9:17 pm

Aetixintro wrote:Every measurement happens in the present, thus a neutron can't be measured "from the future". And as we measure, the very signal of this measurement still carries with it the present, even though you like to write "the past". Just this. I'm not interested in making points/"points" in this for the time being. (Also, partly, because of limited knowledge of (absurd) "thoughts"/thoughts on QM or what is the consensus or best view on QM now!

Cheers! :)
In case you have measured any value of the system it is certainly just the history of the system (already). The measurement (interaction) moves, sends the presence into the history :)
Last edited by Cerveny on Wed Mar 23, 2011 10:33 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Aetixintro
Posts: 319
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 7:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Opinions on Physics - Puzzles, mysteries, that sort...

Post by Aetixintro » Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:58 pm

Some more words on my "Opinions on Physics": My angle to solving or providing a better explanation of gravity can be considered Cascading Effects of Weak and Strong or either of them as purely magnetic force (thus constituting gravity) and holding off Electromagnetic force to itself (by the property of electrons and possibly others). I'm also to enter this into the OP.

Cheers! :)

Mike Strand
Posts: 406
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 6:54 am
Location: USA

Re: Opinions on Physics - Puzzles, mysteries, that sort...

Post by Mike Strand » Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:17 pm

Sounds interesting, Aetixintro. Are you able to write equations which predict things that can be checked through experiment? Or maybe, are you suggesting an new viewpoint for other theorists to work on?

This is the concern of Lee Smolin, in his book "The Trouble with Physics" -- that many of the new and clever theories out there (including the many, many string theories), while profound conceptually and mathematically, are not testable.

User avatar
Aetixintro
Posts: 319
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 7:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Opinions on Physics - Puzzles, mysteries, that sort...

Post by Aetixintro » Thu Mar 24, 2011 11:15 pm

If I'm able to formulate laws of nature expressed in formulas? YES!

Clearly, the convention of physics says 4 forces of nature: Strong Interaction, Weak Interaction, Electro-Magnetism and Gravity.

I say: Strong Interaction, Weak Interaction, Electro-Magnetism and by either or combination of Strong Interaction and Weak Interaction implies "Gravity". So gravity goes out as an own concept and is, by myself at least, only to be known in the future as a cascading effect of either or combination of Strong Interaction and Weak Interaction!

You should note that in light of this view from Smolin, he is also saying that the road ahead should be supported by (empirical) evidence! Have you missed this? :wink:

Alright? Cheers! :)

Mike Strand
Posts: 406
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 6:54 am
Location: USA

Re: Opinions on Physics - Puzzles, mysteries, that sort...

Post by Mike Strand » Fri Mar 25, 2011 2:30 am

I guess I wasn't being clear. I meant, do you have equations for your new concept of gravity which can be checked by experiment?

No, I did not miss the requirement of testability - the importance of experimental evidence to check a theory - as you can see from my last post.

Your conception of gravity being a consequence of two or three of the other fundamental forces sounds exciting. I wish you success and recognition for your work.

Are you going to try to publish your theory? Maybe Smolin would be interested in getting a draft from you and giving you an opinion. Are you going to include a section on how to collect data in order to test your theory? That should impress Smolin and other scientists who appreciate the importance of experimental tests. Also, are you going to show calculations from your equations to demonstrate that (a) your theory predicts outcomes that the current theories predict, and also that (b) your theory explains observations that the current theories fail to explain? -- like dark matter and dark energy, and the apparent anomalies in the trajectories of the two Pioneer spacecraft?

User avatar
Aetixintro
Posts: 319
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 7:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Opinions on Physics - Puzzles, mysteries, that sort...

Post by Aetixintro » Fri Mar 25, 2011 5:41 am

I think my new concept lies first and foremost in description. How one wants to balance out the numbers of strong/weak interactions for making a credible calculation of the new "gravity" is of less importance I think, because the world stays the same and gravity also stays the same, at appx. g=9,81 m/s^2. The job is how one can match these numbers and appear credible while doing so!

Published? I guess you mean Nature or something. No, not anytime soon! You should, though, note that it's already published by myself and thus is regulated under intellectual property!

Cheers! :)

User avatar
Aetixintro
Posts: 319
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 7:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Opinions on Physics - Puzzles, mysteries, that sort...

Post by Aetixintro » Sun Mar 27, 2011 6:56 pm

Further: The experiment on photons. Even though bending the light and making inferences by strength of light (Watts/W) or by the place in spectrum (wave-length, greek letter), one should do a parallel. The parallel follows.
Concerning the mass of the photon, Wikipedia states it to be <1×10^−18 eV (10 in the power of minus 18, very small (smallest? Probably since it is the only quark/quant outside the atom except the electron, so and so, yes neutrino, positron, so and so) and less than this number, but I think it may be possible to set up a vacuum chamber and put an iron in it and "radiate" it with light and given a certain time (some years?) correlated with strong light (?, the strongest?) and see how much weight (mass) it gains by a very sensitive mass-indicator (weighing device)! "<[number]" relates to the eV value of the photon. And while we're on it, perhaps you like to know more about Planck's mass by Wikipedia, link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_mass so you now know how eV relates to m, mass. Cheers! :-)

(This has first been published on Twitter 26th March, yesterday, and this morning, 27th March, combined. I guess my profile: http://twitter.com/Aetixintro should be referenced.)

converge
Posts: 113
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:18 am

Re: Opinions on Physics - Puzzles, mysteries, that sort...

Post by converge » Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:40 pm

Aetixintro,

I think you'll be disappointed by the results of your experiment. Bombarding a piece of iron with photons has been done for quite a long time... it's how blacksmiths made swords. When you hit a piece of metal with photons, they are absorbed and translate into heat. The metal heats up, and photons will be released as infrared heat waves.

User avatar
Aetixintro
Posts: 319
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 7:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Opinions on Physics - Puzzles, mysteries, that sort...

Post by Aetixintro » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:36 pm

My theory is that the (standard object by 1 kg of) iron will as you say, very correctly radiate infra-red waves and thus release photons of this kind in return, but that's only half the story. You can measure this by several detectors. One (set of) detector(s) that can give a number on "escaped" photons. One ampere-meter that keeps track on electricity to fuel the light source onto the iron of ours. Iron in vacuumed chamber, vacuumed chamber measured before and after the iron is inserted, in its vacuumed state. Also, a dark room/chamber should be used to this end, containing the experiement, i.e., making up the laboratory. Once the experiment is set, you can instrument it so that no "idiot" needs to enter the room. Everything is set up so that the data from the experiment is transferred to a computer somewhere else.

I guess this goes for description nr. 2. Cheers! :)

Besides, that smith's thing is no analogy! There are totally different principles going on with a smith's work! Are you a smith? :)

converge
Posts: 113
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:18 am

Re: Opinions on Physics - Puzzles, mysteries, that sort...

Post by converge » Mon Mar 28, 2011 9:48 pm

Heat in blacksmithing is also from convection and conduction, but there is radiant heat as well. My point was that putting a piece of iron into a powerful source of photons isn't really something new. We already know what happens when you shine bright light on something for a while. It heats up. The photon's energy becomes heat and infrared waves. If the photon had mass, there would be no need for this mass to "stick" to the metal. It would be turned into heat energy and released as a lower-frequency photon.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests