0 members (),
515
guests, and
0
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 211
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 211 |
The QM language itself is ambiguous (it appears to me), and it carries an aura of mysticism. I admit that it is not easy to rule out the claims, the ambiguity makes it all the more difficult. We can only wait and see whether everything could be explained on the basis of QM.
Electron can cross solid barriers, because the atoms are nearly empty. Solid conductors and semiconductors allow certain pathways. In perfect insulators, when the thickness is very small, some electrons pass through.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Megastar
|
Megastar
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570 |
Electron can cross solid barriers, because the atoms are nearly empty. Solid conductors and semiconductors allow certain pathways. In perfect insulators, when the thickness is very small, some electrons pass through. Not quite sure where this fits in with the elusive Higgs.
There never was nothing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Megastar
|
OP
Megastar
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819 |
It's a QM effect called quantum tunnelling ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling) the presence of absence of the Higgs would not change it.
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Megastar
|
Megastar
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570 |
I was OK with the tunnelling bit, I just couldn't see where the Higgs fitted in; apparently with some justification.
There never was nothing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Megastar
|
Megastar
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570 |
How does something that is a particle pass through a solid physical barrier???? Could it be beacuse the barrier is not really solid? The Earth appears solid to us, but neutrinos can pass through it unimpeded.
There never was nothing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 84
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 84 |
Does this change anything? "Fabiola Gianotti, an Italian physicist who heads the team running what's called the ATLAS experiment, said "the hottest region" is in lower energy ranges of the collider. She said there are indications of the Higgs' existence and that with enough data it could be unambiguously discovered or ruled out next year. Although it would be an enormous scientific breakthrough for the physics world if the Higgs boson was found, officials at CERN have ruled out making any such announcement this year." http://apnews.excite.com/article/20111213/D9RJLRHO0.html
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,840
Megastar
|
Megastar
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,840 |
Re: Fabiola Gianotti. Yes, I read that too. Higgs may or may not be dead. Another witness is being called to the stand
"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once" - John Wheeler
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Megastar
|
Megastar
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570 |
I liked SV's contribution; could make a good basis for some conspiracy theories.
There never was nothing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Megastar
|
OP
Megastar
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819 |
That's a reference to very modern QM work that shows reality is well "not solid" you need observation to "solidify" things. There was actually an arcicle just last week about putting 2 x 3mm diamonds into entanglement at room temperature ( http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-12-vibration-entangled-diamonds.html) I have left a standing offer to any physicist to be the first volunteer for a human to be entangled if they can work out how to do it :-) .
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Megastar
|
Megastar
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570 |
I have left a standing offer to any physicist to be the first volunteer for a human to be entangled if they can work out how to do it Does it have to be a physicist?
There never was nothing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Megastar
|
Megastar
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570 |
What can not be observed does not exist Could this not also be expressed as "What can not be observed does not exist in the dimensions in which its observation is not possible"? Although this might make no difference in the observable universe, it could still mean that QM might be a "window" onto something beyond.
There never was nothing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Megastar
|
OP
Megastar
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819 |
That would be an accpetable view to science but of coarse it would be non science it runs into the finiter problem :-)
I loved the comment God doesn't roll dice, God is sparse if it is not observed it is not needed ... Rev would like that one.
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Megastar
|
Megastar
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570 |
...but of coarse it would be non science it runs into the finiter problem :-) Does this mean that the multiverse, for example, is non science?
There never was nothing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Megastar
|
Megastar
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570 |
if it is not observed it is not needed Isn’t that a bit arrogant?
There never was nothing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Megastar
|
OP
Megastar
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819 |
Does this mean that the multiverse, for example, is non science?
It's a depends situation ... the basic question can I test anything in this multiverse theory from this universe? Science requires the ability to be able to test for scientific methodology if we could test things about the multiverse then scientifically it would be fine. If the multiverse theory says it exists but you could never test it from this universe then it's not science. Science recognizes the existance of Philosophy, Physchology, Astrology for example but they are not science and in the above case "multiversology" would be accepted but not science.
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Megastar
|
OP
Megastar
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819 |
Isn’t that a bit arrogant?
Noone ever said science wasn't arrogant to some degree we set ourselves up in that way. Religions have said that about science many times I would suspect.
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Megastar
|
Megastar
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570 |
If the multiverse theory says it exists but you could never test it from this universe then it's not science. That's how I see it, but the multiverse, in one or another form, seems increasingly to be proposed as though it were science. I suppose the same could be said for string theory.
There never was nothing.
|
|
|
|
|