The beauty of these privileged intelligences, like Penrose, is that even overwhelm us with their math and language of the Cosmos ( http://paracabarconelmundo.blogspot.com/2009 / 07/la-verdad-es-que-acojona-o-te-desovaria.html ), we offer totally unexpected views of the Cosmos. The example in chapter 25 of his book "The Road to Reality." Talk of the equation Dirac for the electron and the unexpected that can draw from it in the form of the famous and not antimatter, but of matter itself as two different faces within the face material. Says "The Dirac electron can be regarded as composed of two ingredients. You can get a kind of physical interpretation of these ingredients. We formed a picture in which there are two" particles ", one described by A and the other by B, both massless, and where each is continuously developing in the other .... where the forward movement of the zig is changing continuously in the backward movement of the zag and vice versa. In fact, this is a realization of the phenomenon known as zitterbewegung. According to him, the measure of the instantaneous movement of the electron is always the speed of light ... "
Removed
that which everything is reduced to movement end, mechanics, according to physics, this is a lovely idea of not only see antimatter in equational treatment of the entities that seem to build and tend all to a schizophrenic division thereof, see, for example, the electron as two indivisible elements, called zig and zag named in honor of the wave motion in which "zig particle acts as a source of particle zag and vice versa. later asked something so great: "raise the issue of whether these particles zig and zag are or are not" real "Or maybe you are just artifacts of the particular mathematical formalism that have been taken here to describe the Dirac equation for the electron? This raises a question More generally, what is physically justified to allow a display driven by the mathematical elegance of some description and then try to consider that this description corresponds to reality? " (aside how I feel about the "elegance" in general, especially in math. Elegance is that part of the aesthetic that commutes with makeup beauty by ugliness or awkwardness truth) Superb question "What physical justification is to allow one to look drawn by the elegance of a certain mathematical description and then try to consider that this description corresponds to reality?".
And great description for me, considering that the electron two, maybe they are, and not just two but three or something, thus overcoming the quarks, three, comprising the nucleons? (Although in the nucleons is or are so many things, "particles" that are transformed into each other like a crazy costume party) The particle zig zag particle ... and more and more besides that another. I have to climb to one of my journals that idea must walk through my notebooks which set out that the electrons seen as composed of the 3.4 "body", "particles" much more basic, or protons and neutrons, by 529 and some entities of the same ... since so many "things" inside of a proton or neutron, quarks, gluons, which are transmuted into each other, which are very briefly other hadrons ... so still dancing for ever, and how stable are eternal or protons (anger of many who want to see them broken up, although it may take time to do longer life than the universe itself is, on top of successes of the standard theory)
Me Like, I've said, that the electron zig-zag. But what disgusts me, and I have said, is that mechanical treatment given to the entire movement. Being, energy, seen as nothing but movement. Says in Chapter 22.12 in the same book Penrose: "The notions of energy and momentum quantum mysteriously represent or are (essentially) - generators of translation movements of space-time and space." And when I see so treated energy, I can not remember the words Papini Einstein put into the mouth of summarizing all the knowledge of the world turn to physical knowledge synthesis: "Something is moving" . That is the brief summary of all our knowledge. The moves and all notions of translations, rotations, moments. I just see blood
roses snow deflowered my soul 
0 comments:
Post a Comment