0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Try this one.There are no particles, there are only fields. [nofollow]
Particle gets mass when interacting with higgs field(H.F),higgs field is through out the universe and it is an energy field.particles considered as wave"behavior" in QM >wave/Pare. interacting with H.F creating mass >Nature always wants to be in its lowest state and that is why H.F born>In QM Wave Interacting with the lowest known state of energy in universe creating mass>mass is a quantitative measure of an object's resistance to acceleration>If acceleration reaches C mass will be InfiniteOne line is missing! "quantitative measure" >Quantitative measurements are those which involve the collection of numbers.collection of numbers?! Is this a man made concept?!
a. No I don't agree it is a sequence. It's a list - not the same. does any of these "statements"violating the rule of physics? b. Inertial mass - why should this equal gravitational mass? 1) Inertial mass. This is mainly defined by Newton's law, the all-too-famous F = ma, which states that when a force F is applied to an object, it will accelerate proportionally, and that constant of proportion is the mass of that object. In very concrete terms, to determine the inertial mass, you apply a force of F Newtons to an object, measure the acceleration in m/s2, and F/a will give you the inertial mass m in kilograms.2) Gravitational mass. This is defined by the force of gravitation, which states that there is a gravitational force between any pair of objects, which is given byF = G m1 m2/r2where G is the universal gravitational constant, m1 and m2 are the masses of the two objects, and r is the distance between them. This, in effect defines the gravitational mass of an object.As it turns out, these two masses are equal to each other as far as we can measure. Also, the equivalence of these two masses is why all objects fall at the same rate on earth.Are you agree on the above?c. I don't really believe that how we measure and or count determines the reality of our world, merely how we perceive it .Still working on this!!meanwhile you may want to give me an idea "if you think the http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000/elements_as_atoms/quantum_numbers.html [nofollow]" could be engaged in the macro world?!or this has to stay in micro world?And then you lose me about here "if I am not wrong QM talks about the second Cube" Every particle in universe has a pair.Is this correct?Cheers,