Go Back   Physics Help Forum > College/University Physics Help > Nuclear and Particle Physics

Nuclear and Particle Physics Nuclear and Particle Physics Help Forum

Like Tree14Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old May 15th 2019, 04:42 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
Woody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: England
Posts: 932
It seems to me that the theoreticians identify mathematical models that match the observations and give a self consistent description of the subatomic world.

However the behaviours modelled don't relate to the "everyday" world we are used to.
If you take any description of any behaviours (in the everyday world) it will always ultimately boil down to a comparison with something that it is assumed that everyone will be familiar with, from actual direct experience.

It is impossible to construct sensible descriptions of (some/most) quantum behaviours in terms of everyday direct experience.
The only language that provides a sensible description is the language of mathematics.
And even then it is not what you might call "conversational mathematics"...
topsquark likes this.
__________________
~\o/~
Woody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th 2019, 06:54 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: cosmos
Posts: 398
Cool man vs nature

"Use appropriate mathematics/ geometry to represent cosmos (physics)"? haha...
I read an essay about Einstein. It's said that he got a doctor degree in philosophy, not physics, not math...I don't know if I got incorrect information.
What's physics? I feel it's alike a messy high polymer which made up of philosophy, math/geometry, experiment, and even conjecture...
Physical substance determines the natural behavior, whether people are able to describe it or not.
What people can do is to seek a simpler, more appropriate, more intuitive, more pro - man, and of course more all - around method of description to render people able to understand more about nature.
neila9876 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th 2019, 06:59 AM   #23
Forum Admin
 
topsquark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On the dance floor, baby!
Posts: 2,730
Originally Posted by neila9876 View Post
"Use appropriate mathematics/ geometry to represent cosmos (physics)"? haha...
I read an essay about Einstein. It's said that he got a doctor degree in philosophy, not physics, not math...I don't know if I got incorrect information.
No, he had a PhD degree in Physics from the University of Zurich.

Originally Posted by neila9876 View Post
What people can do is to seek a simpler, more appropriate, more intuitive, more pro - man, and of course more all - around method of description to render people able to understand more about nature.
Would you care to share what you are thinking?

-Dan
__________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

See the forum rules here.
topsquark is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th 2019, 07:53 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
Woody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: England
Posts: 932
New Broom

There have been a number of occasions in physics history where the descriptions were getting increasingly complicated
(the epicycles in the orbits of the planets is probably my favourite example).
Then a new idea comes along, sweeps away the complication and opens paths for new discoveries.
(Newton's ideas on Gravity would never have been developed from the epicycle model).
Often the new idea requires the rejection of assumptions that were previously held sacrosanct
(the epicycle assumption held that the heavens are perfect, and circles are perfect, so there can be only circles in the heavens).

The development of the new QM perhaps depends on identifying the appropriate "sacred" assumptions to divest ourselves of.
topsquark likes this.
__________________
~\o/~
Woody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th 2019, 08:41 AM   #25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: cosmos
Posts: 398
Talking island vs island

@Woody:
It seems to be a project of bridge in cosmos (physics). I can't imagine what "sacred" assumption will occur.
@dragon:
Your fundamental Kongfu (功夫) is much better than me. It should up to you to share what you thinking.
This semi - tramp is only a drinker. He drunk and go to sleep....
neila9876 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th 2019, 09:59 AM   #26
Senior Member
 
Woody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: England
Posts: 932
Sacred is in the eye of the beholder

It may be reverence for a religious belief system.
I would suggest that Christians (for example) tend to go with the Starting and Ending Universe, while Hindus (for example) are more open to the idea of a Cyclic Universe...

It may be reverence for the views of our scientific ancestors.
Thinking in Europe was hampered for centuries because it was held that anything said by Archimedes (or do I mean Aristotle) was unquestionably correct.

It may just be the inertia of ideas,
who is willing to make the leap away from what everyone else believes.
__________________
~\o/~

Last edited by Woody; May 15th 2019 at 10:25 AM.
Woody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th 2019, 11:42 AM   #27
Forum Admin
 
topsquark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On the dance floor, baby!
Posts: 2,730
Originally Posted by Woody View Post
It may be reverence for a religious belief system.
I would suggest that Christians (for example) tend to go with the Starting and Ending Universe, while Hindus (for example) are more open to the idea of a Cyclic Universe...

It may be reverence for the views of our scientific ancestors.
Thinking in Europe was hampered for centuries because it was held that anything said by Archimedes (or do I mean Aristotle) was unquestionably correct.

It may just be the inertia of ideas,
who is willing to make the leap away from what everyone else believes.
Archimedes was probably in there but the Medievil Catholic Church was drunk on Aristotle for a good while. (And considering that Aristotle would have been branded as a "pagan" by the Church makes it even more strange to me.)

-Dan
Woody likes this.
__________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

See the forum rules here.
topsquark is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 30th 2019, 07:33 AM   #28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: cosmos
Posts: 398
Smile

@benit:
Why a qualified particle physicist such as you would rather to say "hypotheses" while dare not to ask"if the composition is quantum number?" What quarks make up electron? True quarks make up proton while "hypothetical" quarks make up electron?
neila9876 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 30th 2019, 07:54 AM   #29
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 393
Originally Posted by neila9876 View Post
@benit:
Why a qualified particle physicist such as you
I did my PhD in astrophysics, so I wouldn't call myself a particle physicist, but I know a lot about nuclear reactions because I studied stellar evolution and nucleosynthesis.

would rather to say "hypotheses" while dare not to ask"if the composition is quantum number?"
I have no problem with that question.

However...

What quarks make up electron? True quarks make up proton while "hypothetical" quarks make up electron?
... nope. Electrons, like neutrinos, are leptons (see image below). Leptons do not have quarks.

Only hadrons are formed from quarks. Baryons have three and mesons have two (a quark-antiquark pair).



Quarks are not hypothetical, since there's plenty of evidence for them from hadron collider experiments.

I don't really know anything about Majorana neutrinos or the existing literature about them, but from my university studies, it seems that they are hypothetical because it is difficult to perform experiments that test for them. The masses of neutrinos and antineutrinos is an open problem.
topsquark likes this.

Last edited by benit13; May 30th 2019 at 08:06 AM.
benit13 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 30th 2019, 08:19 AM   #30
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: cosmos
Posts: 398
Talking

I'm the first to anti stronger and stranger colliders.
Attached Thumbnails
Majorana Neutrino-22555.jpg  
neila9876 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Physics Help Forum > College/University Physics Help > Nuclear and Particle Physics

Tags
majorana, neutrino



Search tags for this page
Click on a term to search for related topics.
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Physics Forum Discussions
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Neutrino and conservation of energy. avito009 Physics 8 Jul 29th 2017 10:54 AM
Neutrino travelling at the speed of light. avito009 Physics 3 Jul 25th 2017 02:45 PM
Fourth Neutrino topsquark Physics 0 Jan 26th 2011 02:06 PM


Facebook Twitter Google+ RSS Feed