The Naked Scientists
Toggle navigation
Login
Register
Podcasts
The Naked Scientists
eLife
Naked Genetics
Naked Astronomy
In short
Naked Neuroscience
Ask! The Naked Scientists
Question of the Week
Archive
Video
SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
Articles
Science News
Features
Interviews
Answers to Science Questions
Get Naked
Do an Experiment
Science Forum
Ask a Question
About
Meet the team
Our Sponsors
Contact us
User menu
Login
Register
Search
Home
Help
Search
Tags
Recent Topics
Lonely Topics
Login
Register
Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side
New Theories
Why is QT paradoxical?
« previous
next »
Print
Pages: [
1
]
Go Down
Why is QT paradoxical?
4 Replies
3346 Views
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
socratus
Sr. Member
329
Activity:
0%
Why is QT paradoxical?
«
on:
23/03/2008 13:45:26 »
Why is QT paradoxical?
=================
The theory which we call Quantum Mechanics is a very
strange theory. Because when we are talking about mechanics
it means that we can imagine and see this process visual.
But the QM came with no visual aids, no model to picture
in one's mind. Now this theory is a purely mathematical
formalism, difficult to use and impossible to visualize.
It simple gives the right answers to the most complicated
theoretical question. Such situation satisfy maybe 99%
of physicists. But there are few physicists who don’t agree
with this situation. They want to understand QT without paradoxes.
I consider that these paradoxes are connected with only one reason:
" Nobody pays attention on geometrical form of particle".
===============..
Now the physicists follow " pure " mathematicians.
" Since the mathematical physicists have taken over,
theoretical physics has gone to pot.
The bizarre concepts generated out of the over use and
misinterpretation of mathematics would be funny if it were not
for the tragedy of the waste in time,
manpower, money, and the resulting misdirection."-
- said Richard Feynman.
There is difference between the " pure" mathematics
and the mathematics of theoretical physics.
" Pure" mathematics is infinite and the mathematics
of theoretical physics is limited by nature laws.
The " pure " mathematicians have all right to create
and use abstract models ( point, line …etc)
Physicists must use mathematical apparatus in connection
with real object, with real particle.
And they forgot about this fact.
For example.
1.
In thermodynamics particles are " mathematical point",
2.
In QT particles are " mathematical point",
3.
In SRT particles are points.
But according SRT the " mathematical point",
cannot be a firm " mathematical point" .
It means it is a " elastic point",
which can change its form. (??!!).
4.
When this " mathematical elastic point " fly with speed c=1
its form become flat circle.
/ not a " mathematical point" fly with speed c=1./
5.
In QED electron is elastic sphere,
which can change its form. (??!!).
6.
The power, impulse, linear and angular momentum
in physics is also a " mathematical point".
7.
Then one a " mathematical point" /particle/ interact
with another a " mathematical point" / power, impulse /
the physicists say: " The micro-world is paradoxical."
8.
If physicist think about particle as a " mathematical point"
the result can be only paradoxical.
And I am sure if somebody takes into consideration the
geometrical form of particle the paradoxes of QT will disappear.
========..
P.S.
Italy. Railway station.
It was more then two hours till the departure of the train.
I went to the café and ordered a cup of coffee. Soon two men
and a very beautiful, slim woman took place opposite me.
They ordered something to drink and one of the man opened a
case of violin and took out a bow. He began to explain something
about a bow , carefully and gently touching it. Then another man
took this bow and also enthusiastically continued this conversation.
For half an hour the bow was passed from one hands to another
following with enthusiastic discussion.
And the beautiful woman looked at both these men without saying a word.
For half an hour I watched this group with admiration and excitement.
What a class! What a cultural level! What a beauty!
=======================..
And now let's imagine the bow pressed into a "mathematical point"
and the musicians speak seriously about a " mathematical point "
which must produce a sound from a violin. Everybody will say I
describe an idiotic situation. Well, I agree.
But why don’t anybody say it to physicists when they observe the
elementary particle as a " mathematical point " , without paying
attention to its geometrical form.
==========..
P.S.
When Feynman said " I think I can safely say that nobody understands
quantum mechanics. " it was only because nobody took into consideration
the geometrical form of particle.
========================================
Logged
The secret of 'God' and 'Existence' hide
in the “Theory of Light quanta”.
robinpike
First timers
2
Activity:
0%
Why is QT paradoxical?
«
Reply #1 on:
03/04/2008 14:49:52 »
Hello Socratus,
I too question whether 'point-like' objects have any real meaning.
Yes I can understand how they can be used in a calculation that gives the same results as what is measured, but that is a pretty meaningless argument for their existence. For example, if you were to treat the earth as a 'point-like' object, you would be able to calculate its orbit around the sun, or the moon's orbit around the earth, perfectly accurately, but those perfectly accurate calculations do not then prove that the earth is a point-like object (obviously).
I believe that anything that exists must have a shape, even if it can change its shape (but not have several shapes at the same time). I like investigating how an object's shape might influence its behaviour.
For example, a shape that I find particular interesting is the string shape.
First of all, this has nothing to do with 'string-theory' and its multiple dimensions.
The reason why a particle with a string shape is so interesting, is because it can be coiled up to create two forms of itself, equivalent to each other but different, like 'mirror images' of each other, rather like our left and right hands are the same but different.
Once you have got these two forms, everything you then go on to make from them, retains the ability to be distinguishable but equivalent at the same time.
For example if coils of the same 'handiness' are joined together to make a column, then two types of columns can be made.
And if the two types of column are bent around to form a torus, then two types of torus can be made.
This makes it a very useful shape to use when thinking about what shape a fundamental particle might be.
Logged
socratus
Sr. Member
329
Activity:
0%
Why is QT paradoxical?
«
Reply #2 on:
03/04/2008 18:29:43 »
Where is it possible to use your model of "coils particles"?
In Vacuum? In Tr/D? In ED, QED ? In SRT,GRT ? In atom?
Can you use them in the "star formation" ?
=========================
Best wishes.
Logged
The secret of 'God' and 'Existence' hide
in the “Theory of Light quanta”.
robinpike
First timers
2
Activity:
0%
Why is QT paradoxical?
«
Reply #3 on:
04/04/2008 19:21:03 »
My interest into how the shape of a particle can give rise to a particle's properties is not really related to any particular theory.
Although yes of course, what I want to achieve is an understanding of how our universe works, I have sort of thought about this whole thing back to front.
A few years ago, I noticed that if you start with a particle in the shape of a string that moves at a constant speed, then you can use these string-like particles to make complex particles that have properties that don't exist in the original string particle.
For example, the string particle moves at a constant speed, but if you coil it up, the string particle in the shape of a coil then moves through space - forward through space that is - at a slower speed.
What is more, if you join many of the coils together to form a column, and bend the whole column round into a circle, you then get a particle which can - as a whole - stand still in space. Or it can move through space at any speed, but it can never move faster through space than the column particles themselves.
That is sort of interesting, but what really caught my interest is when an attempt to introduce an electric field to the string particle is made, because it appears (as far as I can tell) that it is not possible to make the push and the pull of such an electric field equal.
There seems to be an inherent break in symmetry in introducing the electric-like field - and it is all down to the shape of the particles, i.e. down to the particles being shaped as a coil and having two 'mirror image' forms.
So that got me thinking whether this inherent break in symmetry could be related in anyway to how gravity works in our universe - yes a huge step of course, but one I find interesting to investigate.
There are other things that this inherent break in symmetry gives rise to too, and they are all down to the shape of the particles.
Logged
socratus
Sr. Member
329
Activity:
0%
Why is QT paradoxical?
«
Reply #4 on:
05/04/2008 04:10:14 »
Maybe biophysicists use your model of "coils particles"
in the DNK theory.
Logged
The secret of 'God' and 'Existence' hide
in the “Theory of Light quanta”.
Naked Science Forum
Why is QT paradoxical?
«
Reply #4 on:
05/04/2008 04:10:14 »
Print
Pages: [
1
]
Go Up
« previous
next »
Tags:
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...