22
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 774:
Line 774: − Don't drag funding issues into it. You're dodging the issue. As you know, the Europeans paid for the Large Hadron Collider so all the geniuses are moving to Europe. The last smart person to leave America, please turn out the lights.+ − + + + +
→Non-Locality and Quantum Field Theory
Why have you decided that action at a distance is the only possibility? Just because Newton's theory assumed it without proof, this does not mean all forces in nature must likewise be action at a distance. Think about this: suppose you and I are ice-skating. I toss you a football. When I throw the ball, reaction force pushes me backward. When you catch it, the collision pushes you away from me. Basic repulsive force at a distance, composed of local pairwise interactions. All forces in the standard model (electrodynamic, weak nuclear, strong nuclear; that is electroweak and QCD) work that way. The footballs are virtual bosons of spin 1.
Why have you decided that action at a distance is the only possibility? Just because Newton's theory assumed it without proof, this does not mean all forces in nature must likewise be action at a distance. Think about this: suppose you and I are ice-skating. I toss you a football. When I throw the ball, reaction force pushes me backward. When you catch it, the collision pushes you away from me. Basic repulsive force at a distance, composed of local pairwise interactions. All forces in the standard model (electrodynamic, weak nuclear, strong nuclear; that is electroweak and QCD) work that way. The footballs are virtual bosons of spin 1.
"All evidence is against your view"? What evidence? What are you talking about!? "Your view"? Hell of a dismissive thing to say. It's not "my view", it's the view of everybody in physics, including Weinberg and Wilczek. Do you even know the meaning of the quotes you lifted out of Wilczek and Weinberg's speeches!?
But don't dismiss field theory as "philosophy". You're playing word games because you can't back up your statements with facts. These are facts: with field theory you can predict the experimental value of the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron to one part in a trillion. Of the muon, to one part in a billion. You can actually compute the mass of protons and neutrons and mesons from first principles, a priori! Newton's gravity could never predict anything to one part in a billion. Why do you call field theory philosophy, but Newton's theory is science? Explain the definition of philosophy you're using here. Word games! [[User:Cuddlytakun|Cuddlytakun]] 23:55, 18 May 2009 (EDT)
Oh, you lose on facts, so you drag funding issues into it. As you know, the Europeans paid for the Large Hadron Collider so all the geniuses are moving to Europe. The last smart person to leave America, please turn out the lights.
But don't dismiss field theory as "philosophy". You're playing word games because you can't back up your statements with facts. These are facts: with field theory, you can predict the experimental value of the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron to one part in a trillion. Of the muon, to one part in a billion. You can compute the mass of protons and neutrons and mesons from first principles, a priori! Which is an inherently relativistic computation (m = E/c2, with E from local QCD.) The Z boson's existence and mass were predicted before its discovery via electroweak theory, which is an entirely local Hamiltonian. Newton's gravity could never compute anything to an accuracy of one part in a billion, or compute masses of particles a priori, or predict new particles before they're observed! Why do you call field theory philosophy, but Newton's theory is science? Explain the definition of "philosophy" you're using here. Word games!
[[User:Cuddlytakun|Cuddlytakun]] 23:55, 18 May 2009 (EDT)