Our knowledge.
Quantum of light (photon) is a point.
Electron is a point/ sphere.
Proton is a point / sphere.
They created an (point / sphere) atom.
The atoms form :
a) stars . . .planet,
b) cells . . . . life.
All the rest are trivialities.
==.
Question.
Why does Physics have many branches which
don’t incorporate and doesn’t have Unified theory?
=============.
The atoms form cells . . . . life (consciousness) .
Question.
Where does consciousness come from?
S.
At what step begin consciousness ???
/ Laurent DAMOIS /
=.
The organization in living systems happens first
at a level of Quantum World.
1.
Book ‘The Nature of Consciousness.’
Pages 175-176. by Evan H. Walker.
‘Consciousness may be associated with all quantum
mechanical processes . . . . , the universe is ‘inhabited’
by an almost unlimited number of rather discrete conscious,
usually nonthinking entities that are responsible for the
detailed working of the universe’.
2
Book ‘The Physics of Consciousness.’
2000. Evan Walker
“… indeed an understanding of psi phenomena and of
consciousness must provide the basis of an improved
understanding of quantum mechanics.”
3
consciousness.arizona.edu/
4
Keynote Luc Montagnier,
Nobel Laureate, Pasteur Institute,
Lecture:
The transfer of biological information through
electromagnetic waves and matter.
5.
Book: Quantum physics meets biology.
/ By Markus Arndt, Thomas Juffmann, Vlatko Vedral /
univie.ac.at/qfp/publication … %20HFSPJ….
===============.
Because people are convinced that particles are points instead of waves. You can diffract an electron. It has spin angular momentum and magnetic dipole moment. And you make it along with a positron from a photon, via pair production. A photon is an electromagnetic wave. Radio waves are too, and they can have a wavelength of 1500 m. Or more. Electromagnetic waves aren’t points. Have a read of this interview with Carver Mead: laputan.blogspot.com/2003_09_21_ … chive.html
Waves would suggest an analog situation, while points seem to be digital in nature. Can’t they both share the same characteristics?
^^ Reason by analogue only. If you want to know what’s happening look at the maths.
How do you account for the particle-like behaviour of photons and electrons that is demonstrated in a) the photoelectric effect and b) double-slit experiments? I’m convinced that particle-like behaviour is that discrete sort of behaviour that arises when one is trying to measure precisely that: a (group of) particle(s). Wave-like behaviour arises similarly when one is trying to measure waves. There’s simply no absolute cut and dry answer though: matter is literally composed of both of these things at the same time, and the emergent property depends upon the type of measurement.
Mathematics is at the heart of everything.
/ MrMermaid /
===.
Pecking order of the sciences:
Biologists answer only to Chemists.
Chemists answer only to Physicists.
Physicists answer only to Mathematicians.
Mathematicians answer only to God.
The result.
‘ Since the mathematical physicists have taken over,
theoretical physics has gone to pot.
The bizarre concepts generated out of the over use and
misinterpretation of mathematics would be funny if it were not
for the tragedy of the waste in time, manpower, money,
and the resulting misdirection.’
/ Richard Feynman./
Mathematics may be defined as the subject where we never know
what we are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true.
/ Bertrand Russell./
======== .
I resaved massage from " pure " mathematician.
==============…
Do mathematicians understand Physics?
To answer your question directly,
Mathematicians are NOT physicists.
Therefore, you can’t expect a mathematician to understand
everything a physicist knows and vice versa.
Usually the two fields are closely intertwined however,
so there is a lot of shared knowledge.
It is just as much of a mistake to say that mathematicians understand everything
about physics as it is to say mathematicians understand nothing about physics.
Mathematics is an abstract representation of the real world which is applicable
in just about every profession which makes it a fundamental skill. By using it,
you can model the real world to make accurate predictions.
However, math is worthless if you can’t effectively use it in the real world.
Physics uses a lot of math to model the real world.
You can’t be a good physicist if you don’t have math ability and reasoning skills.
To respond to the original post, I’ll ask this: Should we believe a physicist
who doesn’t understand mathematics?
/ . . ./
=========…
My comment.
I think the " pure " mathematicians are 100% correct.
The " pure " mathematicians have all right to create
and use abstract models ( point, line …etc)
The guilt lies on physicists .
They must use mathematics in connection
with real object - particle. And they forgot about this fact.
================.
S