Hello Georges> As always its a pleasure to hear from you. I will have to give your response care ful examination. I will get back asap. Thank you. Have a good time. johnreed
On Aug 20, 1:28 am, Georges Metanomski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- On Tue, 8/19/08, johnlawrencereedjr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > From: johnlawrencereedjr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: [epistemology 9226] johnreed take 25 - August 17, 2008 > > To: "Epistemology" <[email protected]> > > Date: Tuesday, August 19, 2008, 9:43 PM > > johnreed take 25 > > The Atom as a Compacted Electromagnetic Field Structure - > > =============== > Impressing and sad. > Impressing, because of the enormous and apparently sincere > endeavor. > Sad, because based on wrong foundations and thus amounting > to useless rediscovering of boiling water. > > If you skipped QM which is a recipe of formulas void of > phenomenal sense and looked a bit at the Quantum Field > Theory (QFT), you would find that it said longtime before > you all what you say, only better. BTW, not only said, > but vastly and successfully applied. > > You would see that QFT considers “particle” as a state of > the Field such that a particle detector may register it. > It faces mathematical > problems, because the states of Field registered as > Particles are its singularities and there is no > non-linear Algebra allowing to represent singularities. > All we can do for the moment is to "normalise" them, > procedure no less than dubious in Dirac's opinion: > > "When you get a number turning out to be infinite which > ought to be finite, you should admit that there is > something wrong with your equations, and not hope that > you can get a good theory just by doctoring up that > number." > (We need) "some fundamental change in our ideas, > probably a change just as fundamental as the passage > from Bohr's orbit theory to quantum mechanics." > > This change will probably entail on the one hand a > singularity compatible Algebra and, on the other hand, > the unification of four known Fields, > > It seems that these two areas encompass most, if not all > currently possible development of fundamental, theoretical > Physics. If I had your age and drive, I'd move there > rather than tediously rediscover QFT. > > Georges. > ============= --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
