Debate Mansion
Debate Mansion

India-Forums

   

If you believe in God, refute this! (Page 139)

Vintage.Wine Goldie
Vintage.Wine
Vintage.Wine

Joined: 03 July 2012
Posts: 1152

Posted: 28 October 2012 at 1:56pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by K.Universe.

Originally posted by Freethinker112




For instance, photons are fundamental particles too but not all photons are the same, they differ by energy. Quarks are fundamental too but they have flavors (6 to be precise) with varying electrical charges depending upon the flavor.

Electrons on the other hand are identical. You can't distinguish one electron from another.

My question was about that "random" process that happened in the initial seconds of the big bang (lepton epoch) when electrons formed. How can one process "create/form" gazillions of particles ALL of which have the exact same mass, same charge and whatever other properties of those particles we know. The question was not about how is a process "creating" (as baffling as that is) but creating with such precision. As an analogy, we can't create golf balls that are identical. We might think they are but they wouldn't be.


 K ... Tongue

  It's not possible to imagine that can happen unless they are the same particle traveling back and forth in time at Infinite Velocity ...The Wheeler's theory of course ...
 
 Now to the popular question ...Why positrons ain't equal in number as the Electrons ...My conjecture is ...(  speculative again ) as that electron moves back and forth ...Something happens on it's way back in time ( Along the world lines ..)  When the time and thus the  charge reverses to make it a positron .. I think on its way back due to some unknown random phenomena the electron particle loses it's charge momentarily ...Only Randomly .. But on its way back up in time that never happens ...

                                                                                Or

  It happens both ways ..but less number of times on the way forward than the way back in time ...


 Hm ... This is making me go barmy again ..LOL

 Vintu ... Ouch

 





The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

K.Universe.

K.Universe. Goldie
K.Universe.
K.Universe.

Joined: 02 September 2012
Posts: 1147

Posted: 28 October 2012 at 2:55pm | IP Logged

Unless we start looking at it all in terms of ripples / excitations / fluctuations in fields, we will be mired in scales that are mere abstractions of the real.

Fields extend throughout space. Fields contain energy.

At that point, it is a question of explaining how a field "feels" a force.

As some of you might already know, when we touch an object with our hands, it is in fact electrons of our hands and the electrons of the object that we are touching, repelling each other, and us "feeling" the object as a consequence.

In other words, it is fields interacting with each other but one field "feeling" the force of those interactions.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is what we need to understand. In any two interacting fields, why does one particular field "feel" the force?


The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

Vintage.Wine

Vintage.Wine Goldie
Vintage.Wine
Vintage.Wine

Joined: 03 July 2012
Posts: 1152

Posted: 29 October 2012 at 1:30pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by K.Universe.


Unless we start looking at it all in terms of ripples / excitations / fluctuations in fields, we will be mired in scales that are mere abstractions of the real.

Fields extend throughout space. Fields contain energy.

At that point, it is a question of explaining how a field "feels" a force.

As some of you might already know, when we touch an object with our hands, it is in fact electrons of our hands and the electrons of the object that we are touching, repelling each other, and us "feeling" the object as a consequence.

In other words, it is fields interacting with each other but one field "feeling" the force of those interactions.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is what we need to understand. In any two interacting fields, why does one particular field "feel" the force?



 
@ Blue Bold:  Gentlemen ...Tongue ...May be that is why many refrained from answering ...LOL  << Kidding .. LOL  ...But I would even if not too many might believe I fall in that category...The reason ? I suspect the Anti Particle level inside my brains has started to rise ...after reading all  theories ...So I better answer before I energize ...Tongue

 On a Serious not:  Feeling ? as in ..The temperature ...Force ...and the other attributes of the object we touch? I believe it  should be illusive ...And the death is when we stop feeling all illusions ..Cause if I touch a stone ..I would feel it .But I suspect the stone won't ..Cause it doesn't have the consciousness ...Ouch
 
 Everything seems pretty illusive to me now ...Even the time ...Like its curved ..and we are traveling both Forward and backward in time  ..Like that ONE ELECTRON in the Universe ..So if the time is circular the regression too won't be infinite ...And we ll reach the Big Bang phase again ...Which might mean even the time  is either stationary ...or illusive ..Tongue ..Nothing is happening nowhere ...We just feel it ..till the time of death ..Oh! and I guess the time slows with acceleration / gravity ..( Relatively .. Gravitational Time Dilation ...)

 The point is this illusion ..may be a product of pure energy ..separate from all mass...Which parts us at the time of death ...Or may be nothing of what I have written here is true ...LOL ..Both everything and Nothing is possible ..

 Thank you .. LOL

 Vintu ...Tongue

PS : Ignore if you find it trivial..LOL


BirdieNumNum Senior Member
BirdieNumNum
BirdieNumNum

Joined: 07 October 2012
Posts: 972

Posted: 29 October 2012 at 1:37pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by K.Universe.


Unless we start looking at it all in terms of ripples / excitations / fluctuations in fields, we will be mired in scales that are mere abstractions of the real.

Fields extend throughout space. Fields contain energy.

At that point, it is a question of explaining how a field "feels" a force.

As some of you might already know, when we touch an object with our hands, it is in fact electrons of our hands and the electrons of the object that we are touching, repelling each other, and us "feeling" the object as a consequence.

In other words, it is fields interacting with each other but one field "feeling" the force of those interactions.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is what we need to understand. In any two interacting fields, why does one particular field "feel" the force?



i think conservation of momentum and energy still apply. These are preserved as we go from first particle to field and on to 2nd particle. In quantum field theory, i think the forces between 2 particles ultimately have other particles in between acting as intermediaries- photons? But i think you were talking fields in general.

i am not sure however why we are getting so technical. "Whatever" it is, field/ particle/ energy, what created it? Or did it not need creation? And when i say "it", i mean "all of it". We can go on with discussion about how 1 particle creates/ transmutes into another based on conservation principles. But what's more relevant imo when we are looking for first origins is what created it all. In that vein, i find  theories that talk about space creating matter/ anti-matter pretty interesting...
K.Universe. Goldie
K.Universe.
K.Universe.

Joined: 02 September 2012
Posts: 1147

Posted: 29 October 2012 at 10:20pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by BirdieNumNum

i think conservation of momentum and energy still apply. These are preserved as we go from first particle to field and on to 2nd particle. In quantum field theory, i think the forces between 2 particles ultimately have other particles in between acting as intermediaries- photons? But i think you were talking fields in general.

i am not sure however why we are getting so technical. "Whatever" it is, field/ particle/ energy, what created it? Or did it not need creation? And when i say "it", i mean "all of it". We can go on with discussion about how 1 particle creates/ transmutes into another based on conservation principles. But what's more relevant imo when we are looking for first origins is what created it all. In that vein, i find  theories that talk about space creating matter/ anti-matter pretty interesting...


Reason I brought up the subject of fields was to "resolve" electron indistinguishability.

And, as an afterthought, I wanted to emphasize the importance of fields from the point of view of disturbances happening in those fields; these disturbances are nothing but "virtual particles". Your statement about empty space creating matter / anti-matter of course deals with these very disturbances that I was talking about!

To understand "real particles" we need to understand why the vacuum state is unstable enough to produce these disturbances ("virtual particles"). These form the bridge between the "something" that is the physical universe and the "nothing" that is the vacuum (free space). To get to "nothing", the disturbances in fields have to be fleshed out.





Edited by K.Universe. - 29 October 2012 at 10:19pm

The following 2 member(s) liked the above post:

BirdieNumNum_Angie_

Vintage.Wine Goldie
Vintage.Wine
Vintage.Wine

Joined: 03 July 2012
Posts: 1152

Posted: 29 October 2012 at 10:28pm | IP Logged
 
 Yeah and there is this another something that baffles me further. The farthest known Galaxy is some 13.23  Billion Light Years away ...Now if its the same cute electron that creates an illusion of the matter there and even here where we are ...ie : Velocity = Infinite  m /s ... How could the Electron still have Mass ? Ouch

 The Charge / Mass (ratio) of  electron is known ..and I guess nothing that  travels  @  'C'  should have any mass at rest ..( like Photons ..If I'm not mistaken...) So how the heck can this electron traveling at many ..in fact infinite times faster than 'C' have any mass ? ...Tongue

 Vintu .. Ouch

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

_Angie_

K.Universe. Goldie
K.Universe.
K.Universe.

Joined: 02 September 2012
Posts: 1147

Posted: 29 October 2012 at 10:49pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by Vintage.Wine

 
 Yeah and there is this another something that baffles me further. The farthest known Galaxy is some 13.23  Billion Light Years away ...Now if its the same cute electron that creates an illusion of the matter there and even here where we are ...ie : Velocity = Infinite  m /s ... How could the Electron still have Mass ? Ouch

 The Charge / Mass (ratio) of  electron is known ..and I guess nothing that  travels  @  'C'  should have any mass at rest ..( like Photons ..If I'm not mistaken...) So how the heck can this electron traveling at many ..in fact infinite times faster than 'C' have any mass ? ...Tongue

 Vintu .. Ouch


Wheeler was admittedly semi serious about that one electron hypothesis. No way should it be construed as a valid theory, according to Wheeler himself.

To your question: what we are seeing now as being 13.23 billion light years away, as you know, existed 13.23 billion years ago. In other words, we are not measuring that galaxy now. We are only measuring the light reaching us now. So, even if it were the same electron, it is still stuck in time (world-lines?) so we are not seeing one electron here and ANOTHER electron far away. It could still be the same electron. Not saying it is, but doesn't violate that one electron hypothesis based on the condition that you set up, IMO. As a field, however, it extends throughout space.


Vintage.Wine Goldie
Vintage.Wine
Vintage.Wine

Joined: 03 July 2012
Posts: 1152

Posted: 30 October 2012 at 4:29am | IP Logged
Originally posted by K.Universe.

Originally posted by Vintage.Wine

 



Wheeler was admittedly semi serious about that one electron hypothesis. No way should it be construed as a valid theory, according to Wheeler himself.

To your question: what we are seeing now as being 13.23 billion light years away, as you know, existed 13.23 billion years ago. In other words, we are not measuring that galaxy now. We are only measuring the light reaching us now. So, even if it were the same electron, it is still stuck in time (world-lines?) so we are not seeing one electron here and ANOTHER electron far away. It could still be the same electron. Not saying it is, but doesn't violate that one electron hypothesis based on the condition that you set up, IMO. As a field, however, it extends throughout space.



 @ Bold:  True that ...But a bit of a change might help invalidate the hypothesis Tongue ... Why not reduce the observation radius and make that consistent with the earth's age? .. Say The Alpha Centauri system ...Smile

  So obviously what we are seeing now is the image of 4.36 years ago ...Which means the Alpha Centauri system existed  4.36 years ago. ...But we know that earth too existed  4.36 years ago ( At the same time)  ...Which means both the systems existed at that same point in time ..So if it was to be one electron ...It should have been present at both places at the same time ...And as the distance  between the two suggests the electron must have moved much faster than the speed of the light ...ie :  @  infinite velocity ...

 And any speed  > / =  C would challenge the electron's basic nature ..and won't allow it to bear the mass anymore ...Ouch

 Vintu ...Tongue




The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

_Angie_

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Author Replies Views Last Post
Do you believe there is a God ?

2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 89 90

Author: Summer3   Replies: 719   Views: 32665

Summer3 719 32665 18 November 2012 at 11:22pm by Summer3
do u believe in theory of karma?

2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 11 12

Author: monika.   Replies: 94   Views: 4990

monika. 94 4990 20 September 2011 at 11:49am by epiphany.
Believe in prophecies ? Rome to tumble 11 May

2

Author: Summer3   Replies: 10   Views: 894

Summer3 10 894 12 May 2011 at 4:20am by Summer3
Do you believe in "paranormal things"?

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Author: SolidSnake   Replies: 71   Views: 4292

SolidSnake 71 4292 17 September 2010 at 1:42am by _Angie_
Do you believe in fairytales?

2

Author: shalini1323   Replies: 11   Views: 848

shalini1323 11 848 27 April 2010 at 11:41pm by -Believe-

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category / Channels
Forums

Debate Mansion Topic Index

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.

Popular Channels :
Star Plus | Zee TV | Sony TV | Colors TV | SAB TV | Life OK

Quick Links :
Top 100 TV Celebrities | Top 100 Bollywood Celebs | About Us | Contact Us | Advertise | Forum Index