/sci/ - Science & Math

>>6946879
Physicist don't read pop-science, they read journal articles and text books.

Physics enthusiasts read pop-sci.

\thread

>>4793766
see >>4793552

Just because you don't understand what a quantum field is, doesn't make it any less true. Read a fucking book kid.

\thread

>>4777438
>schrodinger evolution
>infinite motion that fit the Standard model

You are all over the place. Schrodinger shit is basic Quantum Mechanics, that was superceded by Quantum field theory. So no one gives a shit about "schrodinger evolution", IT ISN'T A FUNDEMENTAL CONCEPT in our understand of the universe, it is a derived concept from higher level physics. Whatever you have to say about "schrodinger" is meaningless. You need to be actually talking about quantum field theory, not shitty undergrad quantum mechanics.

The notion of "motion" in the standard model doesn't exist in the same way you think it does. Things exists as quantum fields. Do you know what a quantum field is?

Anyway, the classical notion of "motion" is meaningless. You need to be talking about the quantum fields, there excitations, and momenta states. The reason why the physicist didn't reply to you is very very very obvious.

Also, what do you mean by motion is infinite? You know there are multiple types of infinities right? Did you never take a basic set theory course? Even in Quantum field theory there are multiple types of infinities already. You would need to be very specific with the term "infinity".

So which one do you mean?

Bump with actual science

>>3545135
>>3545135
\thread

>>2857447
>How can something come from nothing?

It happens every fucking day, all the fucking time. We can actually observe and even predict, shit "popping into existance from nothing".

Welcome to modern physics bro! You have alot of catching up to do.

>>2590778
Used this a couple of years ago

>>2556530
>something from nothing is illogical and impossible

How is that 1600's physics working for ya?
We see stuff come form nothing all the fucking time! It is well documented, well observed, and happens all the fucking time.

We have a shit ton of physics theory about that stuff, including the standard model, which is currently the most accurate scientifc thoery every constrtuced (in terms of it explanitory and predictive pwoer).

Welcome to reality bro! Book is very related!

>>2541781

>>2407266
All Magnetism/Magnetic phenomina is really just some relativistic effects of electric phenomina (Classical Field Theory, Basic EM).

All electric phenomina can be fully explained using Quantum Field Theory and Quantum Electrodynamics.

The majority of human tech is based upon Electromagntism, as we pretty much got it all covered.

This is probably all over your head, but that is your answer.

Anything else?

>>2358721
>That's arbitrary

Nope, read a book kid.

FYI:
The orginal two wavefucntions do collapse. Basicially, some possibilities are elimitated. However, you will get a resultant wave function again, which yes, needs to be collpased again. Ad Infinium.

Everything is wavefuctions.....DURRRR. You never actually collapse the "totallity" of a wavefuction system. Your "collapse" only elimates certain eigenvalues for certain operators, but doens't actually give the system determinism. Even after you "observe" a wavefunction system, the wavefucntions are still there (albiet alittle different maybe).

The wavefucntions will always be there. Consious observation (just like not-conscious obeservation), only elimates some possibilites, and collapses certian expresseions of the wavefucntion.

The collapse of a wavefucntion only need some external system for the wavefucntion to interact with, it need to be human.

source: pic related

>>2353957
Then that article is wrong, or you just don't understand it right.

You use Qunatum Fields Theory to do basic double slit experiment calculations, its pretty fucking trivial.

I will quote books instead

>>2340971
>>2340971
Quantum electrodynamics includes the weak interaction (because of the electroweak unification).

Just as "Classical Electrodynamics" includes Classical Magnetodynamics, Quantum Electrodynamics includes Quantum Weakdynamics. The proper name should be Quantum Electromagnetoweakdyamics, but no one wants to say that shit, the same way no one wants to say Classical Electromagnetodynamics.

You could use an envolpe term "quantum-mechanical theory" if you wanted, although it is confusing, and not used as such in physics. It doesn't really provide a way to distiingush phenomenlogical models from general theory.

Yeah, some radiactive decays use the strong force, Quantum Chromodynamics.

Source is pic:

>>2304449
Most QFT books

>>2216816
Yes, of course.

All the info you seek it in this book.

\thread

>>2210092
Lol.....nice thinking. But your answer lies in some pretty adavanced Quantum Field theory.

Let just say is well known, that the "photon field" is the more fundemental object then the simple field (EM) you think about. In fact there end up beign a shit ton of more fundemental fields that eventually lead to what you know as the EM field.

The actually particles themselves are usually just thought of as excitations in more fundemental fields, field much more fundemental then the shitty EM field....lol.