The God particle is a fraud

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
DarwinX
Posts: 1298
Joined: April 14th, 2013, 4:30 am
Favorite Philosopher: Stephen Hurrell
Location: Australia

Re: The God particle is a fraud

Post by DarwinX »

Schaps wrote:The entire premise of the original post is false. The researchers never claimed that they had found any evidence of a particle associated with God. The source is from a book The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question" written in 1993 by physicist Leon Lederman. He explains the reason why he called the elusive Higgs-Boson particle "God particle" as follows: "This boson is so central to the state of physics today, so crucial to our final understanding of the structure of matter, yet so elusive, that I have given it a nickname: the God Particle. Why God Particle? Two reasons. One, the publisher wouldn't let us call it the Goddamn Particle, though that might be a more appropriate title, given its villainous nature and the expense it is causing. And two, there is a connection, of sorts, to another book, a much older one..."

Nowhere does he attempt to deceive anyone or to achieve financial gain as a result of that name. He chooses the name in order to illustrate the value to quantum physics of establishing the presence of a fundamental "particle" (for want of a better word). This is not fraud.. The rest of the discussion may be interesting but irrelevant to the original premise.
I'll add more information to the subject title - The God particle, Higgs boson and Higgs field are all frauds. There!!! Are you happy now!!! Note - I only use abbreviated titles in my posts due to the space restrictions.



http://books.google.com/books?id=-v84Bp ... &q&f=false[/quote]
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Beware! The devil wears the mask of a saint.
DanLanglois
Posts: 142
Joined: August 1st, 2012, 12:03 am

Re: The God particle is a fraud

Post by DanLanglois »

DarwinX wrote:A photon is not a mathematical object. It can be explained using mechanical processes. The turning of a hypothetical 2 strand rope creates both clockwise and anticlockwise simultaneously from each end of the rope. Thus, spooky action at a distance can be explained mechanically and quantum physics is not required.
Quantum mechanics is not required because you are not, apparently, doing anything but opining from your armchair. Where is the math? It's science, but w/out math? Why couldn't Einstein get by w/out math, it's optional? And here I recall, that you reject all of Einstein's work.

Example:'physicists like to pretend that there is an underlying mathematical reality.'

This is a clever bit of projection, it is not the physicists who like to pretend that there is an underlying reality. This argument is so cleverly crafted, I suspect that it's insincerely presented. The world of mathematics describes the empirical world of appearance, and nothing 'underlying'. And, that is its power.


How does gravity pull from a distance?..You still haven't answered the question. If physics can't answer this question who can?
The answer I gave, was who cares? I note that physicists don't care. This isn't precisely my technical answer, my technical answer is that you want for metaphysics to be science, and w/practice, the difference becomes clearer, and this has been the trend in physics for centuries, which I call progress.

-- Updated October 20th, 2013, 10:59 pm to add the following --

An example of metaphysics, or 'It can be explained using mechanical processes..' Suppose, that sweet things are made of smooth atoms, and bitter things are made of sharp atoms. We know that, because they hurt the tongue. Liquids are made up of round atoms. Metal atoms have little locks to hold them together. That's why metals are so hard. Fire is composed of small, spherical atoms. Atoms are impenetrable. Let us further pick our way along the knife edge of logic..
Xris
Posts: 5963
Joined: December 27th, 2010, 11:37 am
Location: Cornwall UK

Re: The God particle is a fraud

Post by Xris »

DanLanglois wrote: (Nested quote removed.)


Why is that? What is this 'trouble'? You say that the Earth moves, but you mean the Earth moves relative to the sun? So does the moon. Then, relative to each other, neither the Earth nor the moon moves. Do you just toss this stuff out to see if anybody knows the answer, or are you really impressed? I wonder where you pick up these figures, what is 70 km, this is how far the Earth moves in 2 seconds, relative to the sun? It might trip you up to picture the sun as being the thing that is moving, given the Copernican revolution, but these observations are relative. The Earth isn't moving towards or away from the moon at all, and when the earth orbits around the sun, of course the moon is always tagging along at the same distance from the earth. The orbital speed of the Earth around the Sun averages about 30 km/s, which is only slightly off, if you work for her majesty the queen, maybe. That's how you get 70 km in 2 seconds? Maybe I better show my work, I figure that the circumference of the Earth's orbit is 940 million kilometers, so I divide that by the hours in a year to get our orbital speed in kilometers per hour.

But also, perhaps one might emphasize that we are moving with the Sun around the center of our galaxy. And/or, that we are moving with our galaxy as it drifts through intergalactic space. I'm not sure what you make of this, but I'm suspecting that your relationship to astrophysics is not what you think it is. If you shine mirrors about, and try using lasers and reflectors between two boats/trains/airplanes/of course spaceships, apparently you assume that something breaks badly at what, some threshold speed?

I could add, that the laser beam that we are talking about, is 6.5 kilometers wide, and out of 10^17 photons aimed at the reflector, only one will be received back on Earth every few seconds, even under good conditions. 'Conditions' being the relative motion of the Earth and the Moon, the rotation of the Earth, lunar libration, weather, polar motion, propagation delay through Earth's atmosphere, the motion of the observing station due to crustal motion and tides, velocity of light in various parts of air and relativistic effects. Nevertheless, that the universal force of gravity is very stable, is one of the findings of this experiment, or still operating Apollo science experiment.


I'm flabbergasted that you think you've come up with a thought that didn't occur to, say, whoever has been in charge of lunar laser ranging activities, since 1969. People who actually hang out at observatories are not so clever as to have thought of this? I'm also flabbergasted that you bring this up, something that could have found a crack Einstein's great edifice of General relativity, and may yet. But so far, lunar ranging results support Einstein. But, you miss that point. Flabbergasting. Are you, then, in fact, putting ludicrous effort into joking w/us?

-- Updated October 20th, 2013, 7:40 pm to add the following --


(Nested quote removed.)


You have read and reread 'the claim'? That, General Relativity predicted that gravity would influence the passage of time? Have you, then, read the General Theory of Relativity, or more widely in Einstein? You seem skeptical that Einstein meant to predict any such thing, but how did Einstein become mega-famous? He predicted that stars would be measured as being in slightly the wrong coordinates in the sky, and not where expected, if they were observed during an eclipse. How did he manage to come up with this outlandish prediction? His formulas are relating gravity to time, those are the general relativity formulas. You're probably familiar with the Newton gravity formulas, or at least this might look familiar, Force of Gravity is proportional to mass1*mass2/distance2

Or, the force of gravity acting between the earth and any other object, for example, is directly proportional to the mass of the earth, directly proportional to the mass of the object, and inversely proportional to the square of the distance that separates the centers of the earth and the object.

And, alternatively, Force of Gravity = Gmass1*mass2/distance2 And, here, G represents the universal gravitation constant. The units on G are sensible, but may seem rather odd. And, knowing the experimentally determined universal gravitation constant (a constant of proportionality) allows you to calculate the force gravitational attraction in Newtons - the unit of force.

How, then, is Einstein different? I'm not just confident, I know of a certainty, that this has been competently explained to you before, and all the effort that went into the posts was wasted because you only pretend to be interested. But, how is Einstein different. Well, first of all, you get essentially identical predictions as long as the strength of the gravitational field is weak. However, there are several crucial predictions where the two theories diverge. This is if if velocities are comparable to that of light, or gravitational fields are much larger than those encountered on the Earth.

What I specifically want to get to, here, is that Einstein's theory predicts that the direction of light propagation should be changed in a gravitational field. As has been proven right, which is indicated by precise observations, and I'm talking, both about the effect, and its magnitude. And this is that eclipse business. Einstein predicted that light is bent by the gravitational field around the Sun. Why? Because, he had extended the principle that Inertial mass = Gravitational mass

Like this, suppose that the earth, at one instant, is observing a light ray that came from a distant star. But, because of the influence of the gravitational field near the Sun, the light ray was deflected as it passed near the sun. Starlight will have an angular deflection. Observed in 1919. The stars appeared shifted from their true positions. Spacetime must be curved. And, Einstein used mathematics to describe gravitation, not by a force, but by the curvature of spacetime. Then, it is often useful to think in geometrical terms when discussing concepts in relativity. Say that you have a geometrical concept of a 'point'. But, let's add the time dimension, and refer to a fingersnap, shall we say, not merely as a point, but as an 'event'. And now, when we're doing General Relativity, time read off a wristwatch is thought of as Spacetime-length, along a timelike curve. And, the the separation-distance you measure between two events, is going to be, well, you'll need to do a radar measurement. And, you're looking for the average of your clock times, or one-half the sum your clock-times. What if you want, rather, the elapsed-time you measure between two events. Again, do a radar measurement, and you want, in this case, one-half the difference of your clock-time. And, meanwhile, a light-ray is a lightlike geodesic curve. Which is a geometrical concept. And, how fast the other guy seems to be moving, well, this too, is a geometrical concept, it's the spacetime-angle between two lines. Specifically, you would decompose his velocity-vector into a spatial-part and a temporal-part. Divide the spatial-part by the temporal-part.

But I suppose that you've put all the effort that your going to put, into understanding Relativity, I suppose that it will never be for you, anything but a bore and a humiliation. And, probably, for most everybody who reads this. It's a bit technical for a forum thread, but I don't blame myself. Invest in your education in physics. I'd like to introduce you to this, so that you get something out of it, but you still think that you're going to win a debate for your cult-like crackpot leader. And, I suppose that you should never change, because I don't like surprises.

But I do like relativity, I really do, some people do.
What a load of boring inane nonsense.You do not even understand the questions posed.Making a lengthy reply filled with every day information does not impress me.Come back when you have worked out my questions with a reply that really answers my questions.You are under the impression that education is intelligence, wrong.Any fool can relay this nonsense.
DarwinX
Posts: 1298
Joined: April 14th, 2013, 4:30 am
Favorite Philosopher: Stephen Hurrell
Location: Australia

Re: The God particle is a fraud

Post by DarwinX »

DanLanglois wrote: Quantum mechanics is not required because you are not, apparently, doing anything but opining from your armchair. Where is the math? It's science, but w/out math? Why couldn't Einstein get by w/out math, it's optional? And here I recall, that you reject all of Einstein's work.

Maths is not required to solve the problem. Its a mechanical and logic problem. That's why physicists and mathematicians can't work it out and call it spooky action at a distance.

Physics can't find the answer because they would have to negate 100 years of science in order to find the answer. They would have to forget about quantum mechanics and the atomic model. Start again from scratch, unthinkable! It would be much preferable to cast gravity out of science altogether, rather than admit one small mistake.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Beware! The devil wears the mask of a saint.
Mechsmith
Posts: 210
Joined: October 27th, 2013, 5:09 pm

Re: The God particle is a fraud

Post by Mechsmith »

You can work it out pretty well by regarding gravity as a field. If it is a field of Higgs bosuns then so be it.

Gravity, as close as I have figured is a field that collapses on mass similar to the waves of energy evidenced by water collapse upon the shore. Most of it can be worked out in a bathtub plus time.

We have invented many things to explain what we cannot see. Quite a few things were invented then discarded. This does not necessarily make them fradulent. So be it. Sometimes we can call it educational. Sometime not so much. :?
Raymond
Posts: 317
Joined: January 23rd, 2022, 6:47 pm

Re: The God particle is a fraud

Post by Raymond »

The Higgs boson exists. No doubt about that. But what is nonsensical is the Higgs mechanism. The Higgs field is given a non-zoro vacuum energy, the vacuum expectation value, the VEV. And it's given a value to fit the facts. The mass is claimed to emerge naturally. Not put in by hand, which destroys gauge invariance. But the mass has been put in by hand just the same, in a gauge invariant way. The mass is inserted by hand and imagined to be an interaction with the (virtual) vacuum Higgs field. No physicist has been able to give an understandable explanation how the mechanism works. The Higgs force is a scalar force without direction (like a vector force). Lots of metaphors are used but all insufficient and when the going gets tough a reference to the math is given. The math tells that mass appears. No wonder if you put it in first by hand. But an explanation of what actually happens can't be given. That's because the mechanism doesn't exist. It might exist in condensed state physics but to project it onto particle physics is projecting an image onto something non-existing. The math works but there is no real content. The math describes a chimera, and Goldstone ghost particles testify (like good and bad ghosts, or other ghosts). The particle exists, but its no God particle. Not to speak of the Higgs mechanism. The mechanism of the devil, many partcle physicists being its advocate.
User avatar
User07
New Trial Member
Posts: 4
Joined: May 31st, 2022, 2:17 am

Re: The God particle is a fraud

Post by User07 »

I completely understand the eagerness. And small negligence.
The so-called GOD'S PARTICLE is just a small step in the long-awaited journey. Scientists never claimed that this is the ultimate truth we all have been waiting for. It may take decades to make a progress. But science is the only thing that is going to give us a rational explanation of CREATION & LIFE ON EARTH.

Think about the theory of evolution. It took Mr Darwin a long time to decode the secret. So does Newton in discovering gravity.
The point is we need to be patient with the scientific world. Urging things won't boost the progress. One thing is 100 per cent sure, that the creation was a long process rather than an overnight miracle.
Raymond
Posts: 317
Joined: January 23rd, 2022, 6:47 pm

Re: The God particle is a fraud

Post by Raymond »

The thing that science CAN'T answer is why the material universe is there in the first place. Or better, the 5D entropic-timeless quantum vacuum space"time" structure to let it all happen in (big bangs, life evolving, etc.).
User avatar
Astro Cat
Posts: 451
Joined: June 17th, 2022, 2:51 am
Favorite Philosopher: Bernard dEspagnat
Location: USA

Re: The God particle is a fraud

Post by Astro Cat »

Raymond wrote: April 10th, 2022, 8:23 am The Higgs boson exists. No doubt about that. But what is nonsensical is the Higgs mechanism. The Higgs field is given a non-zoro vacuum energy, the vacuum expectation value, the VEV. And it's given a value to fit the facts. The mass is claimed to emerge naturally. Not put in by hand, which destroys gauge invariance. But the mass has been put in by hand just the same, in a gauge invariant way. The mass is inserted by hand and imagined to be an interaction with the (virtual) vacuum Higgs field. No physicist has been able to give an understandable explanation how the mechanism works. The Higgs force is a scalar force without direction (like a vector force). Lots of metaphors are used but all insufficient and when the going gets tough a reference to the math is given. The math tells that mass appears. No wonder if you put it in first by hand. But an explanation of what actually happens can't be given. That's because the mechanism doesn't exist. It might exist in condensed state physics but to project it onto particle physics is projecting an image onto something non-existing. The math works but there is no real content. The math describes a chimera, and Goldstone ghost particles testify (like good and bad ghosts, or other ghosts). The particle exists, but its no God particle. Not to speak of the Higgs mechanism. The mechanism of the devil, many partcle physicists being its advocate.
As one of the only people I’ve seen that genuinely seems to know what they’re talking about on a more technical level, I wondered if you have a background in science?

I finished QM2 at the grad level just last semester and (at our request) the instructor used the last part of the semester on QFT (I really wanted this to better understand the physics of black hole entropy, others were more on the solid state side and had their own reasons).

In any case, a lot of that class was calculating expectation values (we seemed to do a loooot of half spin examples though… too many haha). We never touched on the Higgs boson at all.

When you say the mass is put in by hand in a gauge invariant way by being imagined as an interaction with the Highs field, what does that look like mechanically? Is there a name for the interaction I can just look up? I’ll probably never need to know on the astrophysics side but it’s still interesting.
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool."
--Richard Feynman
User avatar
Astro Cat
Posts: 451
Joined: June 17th, 2022, 2:51 am
Favorite Philosopher: Bernard dEspagnat
Location: USA

Re: The God particle is a fraud

Post by Astro Cat »

Astro Cat wrote: June 19th, 2022, 7:42 am (I really wanted this to better understand the physics of black hole entropy,
This did nothing for me, in case you were wondering. Lol.

I wanted to understand the Unruh effect underlying Hawking radiation and maybe inflaton fields.

But we spent maybe 2 weeks on QFT.

If only my uni offered a full QFT class.
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool."
--Richard Feynman
Raymond
Posts: 317
Joined: January 23rd, 2022, 6:47 pm

Re: The God particle is a fraud

Post by Raymond »

Astro Cat wrote: June 19th, 2022, 7:48 am
Astro Cat wrote: June 19th, 2022, 7:42 am (I really wanted this to better understand the physics of black hole entropy,
This did nothing for me, in case you were wondering. Lol.

I wanted to understand the Unruh effect underlying Hawking radiation and maybe inflaton fields.

But we spent maybe 2 weeks on QFT.

If only my uni offered a full QFT class.
Hey Astrocat! Meaooow! My background is theoretical physics. Sorry I only now respond but I was a bit busy on Quora (where I got banned, as on most other forums, for exactly denying the Higgs mechanism, and stating my believe in gods...). I think the Higgs mechanism is just a mathematical trick to dump mass in massless matter fields. It's a boson, scalar particle, and a virtual particle can dump only it's energy in particles, like the virtual photon is a particle to which real particles couple while that photons dumps the appropriate energy and momenta to both real charged particles (a virtual particle, being off-shell, can have all energies and momenta independently of one another). The image of photon exchange is quite misleading. There is no emission or absorption of virtual photons. The two real particles couple to the omnipresent virtual field, and the virtual photon delivers them the right energies and momenta, which is represented by the two Dirac deltas in the integral associated with the Feynman diagram. In the case of the Higgs mechanism (where that weird unexplained but very (appropriate!) Mexican hat potential) the virtual Higgs delivers a non-directive force (contrary to the photon, which transfers momentum too, being a vector), which means that only energy is dumped in the massless fields it interacts with. And because the relativistic energy-momentum relation holds for real particles (which are on mass), they wiil acquire mass. So its just energy dumping by hand in the guise of a Higgs mechanism. There are much better and understandable ways to make massive particles, elucidating the relation between energy and mass. Meaoooow! ROAOAOAOARRRR...
Raymond
Posts: 317
Joined: January 23rd, 2022, 6:47 pm

Re: The God particle is a fraud

Post by Raymond »

Astro Cat wrote: June 19th, 2022, 7:48 am
Astro Cat wrote: June 19th, 2022, 7:42 am (I really wanted this to better understand the physics of black hole entropy,
This did nothing for me, in case you were wondering. Lol.

I wanted to understand the Unruh effect underlying Hawking radiation and maybe inflaton fields.

But we spent maybe 2 weeks on QFT.

If only my uni offered a full QFT class.
Well Astro Cat, QFT is actually a lot simpler than it appears to be. I've never understood all the "intelligence" fuzz that surrounds it. Basically it's just about free particles (called asymptotically free, for whatever mysterious reason, assuming incoming and outgoing particles or initial and final states to be free states in an infinite past and future), interacting and following all posdible paths (in position representation, leaving momentum unspecified) or all possible momenta (in the momentum representation, leaving position unspecified). Each possible path, with all possible couplings to virtual particles (which offer the perfect medium since these particles offer the right energy and momenta for all possible energies and momenta, being off-shell). That's basically it. Renormalization is actually introduced because particles are assumed pointlike. This gives infinities, singularities, which can be repaired in all fields that are used by renormalization. But in quantum gravity this approach fails because of the the influence the graviton has on space itself, which for example in QED aint the case (neither in QCD or QFD). Singularities can be avoided though by considering non-pointlike particles. This makes renormalization in all field theories superfluous. So a qft of gravity can be achieved. Virtual particles are, so I think, just real particles, and can be considered the cause of dark energy. They can have momentum without energy, meaning the mass is negative (just look at the relativistic energy momentum relation, and you know what negative mass means.
User avatar
Astro Cat
Posts: 451
Joined: June 17th, 2022, 2:51 am
Favorite Philosopher: Bernard dEspagnat
Location: USA

Re: The God particle is a fraud

Post by Astro Cat »

Raymond wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 8:03 am (a virtual particle, being off-shell, can have all energies and momenta independently of one another).
Independently of each other as in what, the energy and momentum operators don't commute?
Raymond wrote:The image of photon exchange is quite misleading. There is no emission or absorption of virtual photons. The two real particles couple to the omnipresent virtual field, and the virtual photon delivers them the right energies and momenta, which is represented by the two Dirac deltas in the integral associated with the Feynman diagram. In the case of the Higgs mechanism (where that weird unexplained but very (appropriate!) Mexican hat potential) the virtual Higgs delivers a non-directive force (contrary to the photon, which transfers momentum too, being a vector), which means that only energy is dumped in the massless fields it interacts with. And because the relativistic energy-momentum relation holds for real particles (which are on mass), they wiil acquire mass. So its just energy dumping by hand in the guise of a Higgs mechanism. There are much better and understandable ways to make massive particles, elucidating the relation between energy and mass. Meaoooow! ROAOAOAOARRRR...
Ok, I think I get the basic concept here. So the problem you raise with this is that the energy doesn't come from first principles but is entered by hand based on experimental values?
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool."
--Richard Feynman
User avatar
Astro Cat
Posts: 451
Joined: June 17th, 2022, 2:51 am
Favorite Philosopher: Bernard dEspagnat
Location: USA

Re: The God particle is a fraud

Post by Astro Cat »

Raymond wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 9:53 am Well Astro Cat, QFT is actually a lot simpler than it appears to be. I've never understood all the "intelligence" fuzz that surrounds it. Basically it's just about free particles (called asymptotically free, for whatever mysterious reason, assuming incoming and outgoing particles or initial and final states to be free states in an infinite past and future),
Yeah, this language I'm familiar with from several classes. I'm following.
Raymond wrote:interacting and following all posdible paths (in position representation, leaving momentum unspecified) or all possible momenta (in the momentum representation, leaving position unspecified).
Many-paths integrals here, yes?
Raymond wrote:Each possible path, with all possible couplings to virtual particles (which offer the perfect medium since these particles offer the right energy and momenta for all possible energies and momenta, being off-shell). That's basically it. Renormalization is actually introduced because particles are assumed pointlike. This gives infinities, singularities, which can be repaired in all fields that are used by renormalization.
Ok we did a lot of this in graduate QM1 and QM2. I don't remember a lot of undergrad QM, I think it was mostly a big exercise in doing billions of potential well problems, haha. So, sounds like QFT is really just an extension of our grad QM classes.
Raymond wrote:But in quantum gravity this approach fails because of the the influence the graviton has on space itself, which for example in QED aint the case (neither in QCD or QFD). Singularities can be avoided though by considering non-pointlike particles. This makes renormalization in all field theories superfluous. So a qft of gravity can be achieved. Virtual particles are, so I think, just real particles, and can be considered the cause of dark energy. They can have momentum without energy, meaning the mass is negative (just look at the relativistic energy momentum relation, and you know what negative mass means.
I don't think this would work form my basic understanding of what you're saying -- unless there is some way for virtual gravitons (which you posit are real gravitons, doesn't matter here) not to scale with the size of the universe (the negative equation of state would have to remain constant and either exactly -1 as appears to be the case or at least <-0.6, and the negative energy density must remain constant regardless of how the scale factor of the universe changes). It's hard to imagine how particles with negative mass could accomplish this unless something is generating more and more of those particles as the universe expands. Would that be the case?
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool."
--Richard Feynman
Raymond
Posts: 317
Joined: January 23rd, 2022, 6:47 pm

Re: The God particle is a fraud

Post by Raymond »

Astro Cat wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 9:15 pm
Raymond wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 8:03 am (a virtual particle, being off-shell, can have all energies and momenta independently of one another).
Independently of each other as in what, the energy and momentum operators don't commute?
Raymond wrote:The image of photon exchange is quite misleading. There is no emission or absorption of virtual photons. The two real particles couple to the omnipresent virtual field, and the virtual photon delivers them the right energies and momenta, which is represented by the two Dirac deltas in the integral associated with the Feynman diagram. In the case of the Higgs mechanism (where that weird unexplained but very (appropriate!) Mexican hat potential) the virtual Higgs delivers a non-directive force (contrary to the photon, which transfers momentum too, being a vector), which means that only energy is dumped in the massless fields it interacts with. And because the relativistic energy-momentum relation holds for real particles (which are on mass), they wiil acquire mass. So its just energy dumping by hand in the guise of a Higgs mechanism. There are much better and understandable ways to make massive particles, elucidating the relation between energy and mass. Meaoooow! ROAOAOAOARRRR...
Ok, I think I get the basic concept here. So the problem you raise with this is that the energy doesn't come from first principles but is entered by hand based on experimental values?
Hi there! About the energy-momentum vector of the virtual photon. The components have independent values in the sense they don't obey the energy-momentum relation. They are off-shell and as such ideal to couple to. They can deliver each energy and momentum, in order to secure energy and momentum conservation. Virtual particles are thought to shortly appear and disappear but they are always present, going back and forth in time at the same time.


It's the enormous multitude of paths and interactions that gives rise to a multitude of integrals and integrals of them (functionals).

What are you doing with black hole entropy? How is QFT involved here? AdS/CFT, so zcFT?
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Science”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021