On 8/14/06, Harry Veeder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

A recent article by Lee Smolin entitled "A Crisis
in Fundamental Physics"

http://www.nyas.org/publications/UpdateUnbound.asp?UpdateID=41

Excellent article Harry.  I believe it is most certainly on topic.
This is the very attitude which drove Hotson from studying physics:

http://www.geocities.com/terry1094/HotsonPart1.pdf

<sidebar>

The Hotson "family business" is English literature. Mr. Hotson's
father and uncle had Harvard Ph.D.s in the subject, and his late uncle
was a famous Shakespeare scholar. Mr. Hotson, however, always intended
a career in physics. Unfortunately, he could not resist asking awkward
questions. His professors taught that conservation of mass-energy is
the never-violated, rock-solid foundation of all physics. In "pair
production" a photon of at least 1.022 MeV "creates" an
electron-positron pair, each with 0.511 MeV of rest energy, with any
excess being the momentum of the "created" pair. So supposedly the
conservation books balance.

But the "created" electron and positron both have spin (angular
momentum) energy of h/4p. By any assumption as to the size of electron
or positron, this is far more energy than that supplied by the photon
at "creation."

"Isn't angular momentum energy?" he asked a professor.

"Of course it is. This half-integer spin angular momentum is the
energy needed by the electron to set up a stable standing wave around
the proton. Thus it is responsible for the Pauli exclusion principle,
hence for the extension and stability of all matter. You could say it
is the sole cause of the periodic table of elements." "Then where does
all this energy come from? How can the 'created' electron have
something like sixteen times more energy than the photon that
supposedly 'created' it? Isn't this a huge violation of your
never-violated rock-solid foundation of all physics?"

"We regard spin angular momentum as an 'inherent property' of electron
and positron, not as a violation of conservation."

"But if it's real energy, where does it come from? Does the Energy
Fairy step in and proclaim a miracle every time 'creation' is invoked,
billions of times a second? How does this fit your never-violated
conservation?"

"'Inherent property' means we don't talk about it, and you won't
either if you want to pass this course."

Well, this answer sounded to him like the Stephen Leacock aphorism:
"'Shut up,' he explained." Later Mr. Hotson was taken aside and told
that his "attitude" was disrupting the class, and that further, with
his "attitude," there was no chance in hell of his completing a
graduate program in physics, so "save your money." He ended up at the
Sorbonne studying French literature, and later became a professional
land surveyor. However, he has retained a lifelong interest in the
"awkward questions" of physics, and with Dirac's Equation has found
some answers.

<end>

Reply via email to