I believe I understand QM.
I rely on this august group of physicists to disabuse me of my illusion.
I begin by assuming the two most accurate and proven theories in physics are correct; QM and general relativity.
1. Relativity says that we exist in a 4 dimensional universe that we...
I believe I "understand" QM.
I rely on this august group of physicists to disabuse me of my illusion.
I begin by assuming the two most accurate and proven theories in physics are correct; QM and general relativity.
1. Relativity says that we exist in a 4 dimensional universe that we...
Thank you for your reply. It is precisely these "additional particles" that I'm referring to.
Assuming that they indeed survive, I was wondering whether any statistical calculation has been or even can be made to estimate how often virtual particles collide and produce additional particles...
Dan...
Thank you for your response. I am familiar with your point of view on virtual particles. There is another view however, that regards them as particles in all regards for the short time they exist.
It is to these people that my question should have been specifically addressed.
Forgive that to many here this will sound like a dumb question. I have searched and searched and failed to find an answer.
Give the constant creation/annihilation of all forms of particles in ZPE, it seems likely to me that some among them would collide with each other before either had a...
I'm wondering why I haven't run into a discussion anywhere that uses Feynman's model of anti-matter moving backward in time to explain the paucity of anti-matter in our universe.
Quite simply:
The big bang created equal quantities of matter and anti matter.
Almost all that was...
Jesse, help me out here...
In our world there is no such thing as a "t coordinate" anymore than there is such "thing" as an equator. These are concepts we use to communicate with each other.
In the world there are actual things in actual relations with one another.
I do not consider...
I'm referring to what Greene calls a "now slice" and what Petkov calls "a 3 dimensional subset." Each slice/subset is as valid as all the others and none agree when in relative motion.
It's not a measurement issue. Greene calls it a "now list." What exists though all space time at a given...
JesseM...
Thanks for responding. I understand the analogy to the distinction between place and coordinates. On one level, it makes perfect sense and answers my question.
I'm still somewhat uncomfortable with it, though.
In your analogy, the dots are in the same place. Only the...
I don't understand why it has to be quantized. Is there no other way space-time could curve in reaction to mass/energy?
This sounds weird, but I put it forward as a simple possible other approach...
Since according to relativity everything is moving through space-time at the speed of...
Thanks for your replies.
Given the whole problem with even the concept of a graviton, why is it given the credence that it is?
I mean, after "photon", graviton is the most well known force particle. Much more than say, gluon.
It seems to me that it is misleading at best to presume...
It probably would, but for my ignorance.
I don't understand why having a spin of 2 and no mass would make a gravitron behave the same as a gravitational field.
I also fail to see how anything would happen at all if there were "no interaction."
Space-time is the manifold and mass/energy...
Why do singularities mean that GR "breaks down?"
The existence of singularities in the form of black holes as predicted by GR is universally accepted at this point.
The fact that GR calculations don't work inside a black hole means only that we are incapable of penetrating the event horizon...
Thank you for your response.
I still don't understand how a force particle can have the effect of curving space-time. Just what is it that the gravitron is supposedly interacting with?
Why is it that the relativity of simultaneity isn't used to explain wave/particle duality?
RoS requires that matter be in different places according to the speed of the observer. All observers are equally correct.
This would seem to require that particles posses a wave characteristic...