|
|||
This is a blog that takes the name of my magnum opus on scientific philosophy called "The Scientific Worldview." Reviewers have called it “revolutionary,” “exhilarating,” “magnificent,” “fascinating,” and even “a breathtaking synthesis of all understanding.” There is very little math in it, no religion, no politics, no psycho-babble, and no BS. It provides the first outline of the philosophical perspective that will develop during the last half of the Industrial-Social Revolution.
20190424
What is more fundamental, field or particles?
5 comments:
Thanks so much for your comment. Be sure to hit "Preview" to see if it will publish correctly. Then hit "Publish". Include your email address if you wish to receive copies of your comment as well as all other published comments to this Blog.
For those having trouble getting this comment section to work:
Nitecruzr writes:
[FAQ] Why can't people post comments on my blog?
The Blogger / Google login status, and the ability to post comments, is sensitive to both cookie and script filters. Your readers may need to enable (stop filtering) "third party cookies", in their browser and on their computer. The effects of the newly unavoidable CAPTCHA, and the Google "One account" login, requires third party cookies, even more than before.
http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/11/the-google-one-account-login-and-cookie.html
http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/10/comments-and-cookie-filters-october-2014.html
http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/10/the-new-commenting-captcha-is.html
Third party cookies filtering, in a browser setting, is the most common solution, overall - but your readers may have to search for other filter(s) that affect their use of Blogger / Google.
Any filters are subject to update, by the creator. If the problem started a few days ago, your readers may have to look on their computers, and find out what product or accessory was updated, a few days ago.
http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/01/almost-nobody-controls-their-own.html
Here is what Wikipeida states regarding fields:“In the modern framework of the quantum theory of fields, even without referring to a test particle, a field occupies space, contains energy, and its presence precludes a classical "true vacuum." This has led physicists to consider electromagnetic fields to be a physical entity, making the field concept a supporting paradigm of the edifice of modern physics. "The fact that the electromagnetic field can possess momentum and energy makes it very real ... a particle makes a field, and a field acts on another particle, and the field has such familiar properties as energy content and momentum, just as particles can have.”
ReplyDeleteCould not the same could be said about aether?
Here is what Wikipeida states regarding fields:“In the modern framework of the quantum theory of fields, even without referring to a test particle, a field occupies space, contains energy, and its presence precludes a classical "true vacuum." This has led physicists to consider electromagnetic fields to be a physical entity, making the field concept a supporting paradigm of the edifice of modern physics. "The fact that the electromagnetic field can possess momentum and energy makes it very real ... a particle makes a field, and a field acts on another particle, and the field has such familiar properties as energy content and momentum, just as particles can have.”
ReplyDeleteCould not the same could be said about aether?
George:
ReplyDeleteThanks. Let me comment on your Wikipedia quote: "In the modern framework of the quantum theory of fields, even without referring to a test particle, a field occupies space [GB: i.e., there needs to be microcosms with xyz dimensions, that is, "aether" particles] contains energy [GB: this is the typical regressive usage of the term "energy", the field cannot "contain" energy. Contents are always microcosms in motion, things with xyz dimensions. Energy does not exist, it is a calculation describing the behavior of that matter in motion and the motion of that matter.] and its presence precludes a classical "true vacuum." [GB: This is a bow to the aether concept, which is theoretically required. Even Einstein admitted in 1920 there must be an aether, although he did not see it as theoretically required.] This has led physicists to consider electromagnetic fields to be a physical entity, making the field concept a supporting paradigm of the edifice of modern physics. "The fact that the electromagnetic field can possess momentum and energy [GB: Microcosms in motion can be described by the matter-motion terms, but they cannot "possess" momentum or energy.] makes it very real ... a particle makes a field, and a field acts on another particle, and the field has such familiar properties as energy content and momentum, just as particles can have.”
Could not the same be said about aether? GB: Yes, as amended above.]
I agree with everything you wrote in response to the Wikipedia quote.I had the same thoughts when I read that the field "contains" energy. Orthodox physicists consider energy to be substantial. Here is what wikipedia states:
ReplyDelete"In physics, mass–energy equivalence states that anything having mass has an equivalent amount of energy and vice versa, with these fundamental quantities directly relating to one another by Albert Einstein's famous formula e=Mc2."
I am puzzled by physicists who believe that something can "possess" momentum. But as these are the same people who have no trouble accepting the absurd concept of motion without matter, I probably should not be surprised by anything orthodox physicists say.
Right. All the confusion about mass-energy equivalence disappears after you finally understand what Maxwell's E=mc2 equation means (see: Borchardt, Glenn, 2009, The physical meaning of E=mc2, Proceedings of the Natural Philosophy Alliance: Storrs, CN, v. 6, no. 1, p. 27-31 [10.13140/RG.2.1.2387.4643].) In essence, it describes the transfer of internal motion to the macrocosm, which must contain aether particles to receive that motion.
ReplyDelete