Beyond the Standard Model: Difference between revisions

From Cibernética Americana
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
Line 4: Line 4:


# [[:en:General Relativity]] and the concept of spacetime generally. It seems to me that saying that space or space time have a non-Euclidean geometry is while true and an advance over the previous situation. vacuous. Space and spacetime are both ideas, cognitions and perceptions ''of'' physical realities. This theory seems to be  nothing more than a mathematical advance not an an advance in physics per se.
# [[:en:General Relativity]] and the concept of spacetime generally. It seems to me that saying that space or space time have a non-Euclidean geometry is while true and an advance over the previous situation. vacuous. Space and spacetime are both ideas, cognitions and perceptions ''of'' physical realities. This theory seems to be  nothing more than a mathematical advance not an an advance in physics per se.
# [[:en:Quark Confinement]] similar situation. Underlying these is the question: what does it mean for a thing to exist as a physical object? I would say it must first of all be a thing not a nothing, i.e. it must be matter or energy. Unlike space-time quarks may be assumed to be real objects. At this point I haven't been able to understand that they are and therefore suspect they aren't.
# [[:en:Quark Confinement]] similar situation. Underlying these is the question: what does it mean for a thing to exist as a physical object? I would say it must first of all be a thing not a nothing, i.e. it must be matter or energy. Unlike space-time quarks may be assumed to be real objects. At this point I haven't been able to understand that they are and therefore suspect they aren't. More specifically. I reject the assertion that partons have been "observed" based on observation of the production of actual particles in experiments where inference of an internal structure composed of the partons or "quarks". I don't deny that the heretofore fundamental particles may have structure, but I do deny that any has been observed, rather than merely inferred.
# Development Rut. Modern physics has not completed and the current social structure of the sciences I suspect inhibits the synthesis of the available information on the fine structure of the universe begun in the late 19th century with the modern atomic theory. Moreover it seems to me the mathematical understanding has become an end or has been erroneously presumed to lead inevitably to an end. In any case with the first significant [[:en:LHC]] results coming now there could be some movement here soon.  
# Development Rut. Modern physics has not completed and the current social structure of the sciences I suspect inhibits the synthesis of the available information on the fine structure of the universe begun in the late 19th century with the modern atomic theory. Moreover it seems to me the mathematical understanding has become an end or has been erroneously presumed to lead inevitably to an end. In any case with the first significant [[:en:LHC]] results coming now there could be some movement here soon.