On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 12:50:37 AM UTC-5, Bruce wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 3:43 PM Philip Thrift <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 12:21:12 AM UTC-5, Bruce wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 3:14 PM Philip Thrift <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 11:12:58 PM UTC-5, Alan Grayson wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 10:01:19 PM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 at 5:55:36 PM UTC-5, Bruce wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I came across a good article that is apposite to the discussion in >>>>>>> this thread. Arnold Neumaier has an article on virtual particles at: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/vacuum-fluctuation-myth/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> where he looks at the origin of much of the common mythology >>>>>>> surrounding the idea of vacuum fluctuations and virtual particles. >>>>>>> People >>>>>>> should read this and take the lessons to heart -- all of this mythology >>>>>>> arose from well-meaning, but ultimately mis-guided, attempts to explain >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> mysteries of quantum mechanics to lay people. The result was enduring >>>>>>> confusion, that now affects even professional physicists. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Bruce >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Very interesting fellow. Interesting article. I was intrigued reading >>>>>> the link there to his biography of himself being math to applied math >>>>>> ending up in computing and dabbling in physics. Sounded like me! >>>>>> >>>>>> Then >>>>>> >>>>>> Two years after my Ph.D., my formerly atheistic world view changed >>>>>> and I became a Christian. I got convinced that there is a very >>>>>> powerful God >>>>>> <http://www.mat.univie.ac.at/~neum/sciandf/eng/arms.html> who >>>>>> created the Universe, who controls what appears to us as chance, and who >>>>>> is >>>>>> interested in each of us individually. I understood (with Galilei, and >>>>>> later Newton and Maxwell) that God had written the book of nature in the >>>>>> language of mathematics. As a result of these insights, one of my life >>>>>> goals became to understand all the important applications of mathematics >>>>>> in >>>>>> other fields of science, engineering, and ordinary life. It is a >>>>>> challenge >>>>>> that keeps me learning all my life. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/interview-mathematician-physicist-arnold-neumaier/ >>>>>> >>>>>> @philipthrift >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Are you suggesting, maybe tongue in cheek, that his analysis of >>>>> virtual particles is suspect because he believes in a very powerful God? >>>>> Do >>>>> you believe in such a God? AG >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I've always been an atheistic materialist. I don't know if his "denial" >>>> of virtual particles is influenced by his theology or not, but this I know: >>>> >>> >>> >>> Maybe Neumaier is a good enough physicist not to let his theological >>> beliefs influence his physics. Don Page is another such whose name springs >>> to mind. Neumaier's rejection of the reality of virtual particles and >>> quantum foam is soundly based on his good physics. >>> >>> >>> *One physicist says there are Xs. Another physicist says there are no >>>> Xs. One or both is BSing. Probably both.* >>>> >>> >>> Maybe you are the one who is bull shitting? >>> Bruce >>> >>> >>> The luxury (or fun) of math and even applied math is it doesn't matter >>>> if whether you think of the entities of a theory being fictional or not. >>>> It >>>> is useful or it isn't. (In pure math, useful doesn't quite matter as in >>>> applied math.) >>>> >>>> @philipthrift >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> BSing about what? >> > > Bull shitting by bringing personal religious beliefs into the argument. > That is argumentum ad hominem. > > >> I'm not making any claims about whether virtual particles exist. >> >> Here are two statements: >> >> >> "It's an experimentally well-confirmed fact that virtual particles exist." >> - >> http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2019/08/how-do-black-holes-destroy-information.html?showComment=1566705434388#c7842618397891133114 >> >> "Explanations in terms of virtual particles don't really work because >> virtual particles do not exert any force on anything -- because they are >> not real!!!!" >> - >> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/ixyC1nvZ3i8/NsBRnAvdBAAJ >> >> >> Now it seems to me that these are contradictory. Are you saying one is >> absolutely right and the other is absolutely wrong? Are you saying that >> there is some sort of dialethic logic physicists operate with? >> > > There can be differences of opinion......... Think about quantum > interpretations for instance.... > But I am quite sure that Sabine would agree with me about virtual > particles if I sat her down and argued it out. > > Bruce >
When you set up that conversation between you and Sabine Hossenfelder, let us know. Perhaps you could make a podcast of that conversation, it would be interesting. @philipthfift -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/cc7bbdc3-2705-44c3-8900-2ebe06bb127b%40googlegroups.com.
