Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

50% Positive

Analyzed from 468 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#wave#fields#everything#photon#don#particle#quantum#looking#number#particles

Discussion (16 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

whatshisface•2 minutes ago
This is like asking how many corners there are on a loaf of bread. It may help you to look at the loaf harder, which is good, but don't expect an answer!
BobbyTables2•40 minutes ago
Not being a Physicist, I have to wonder if all these particles are somehow manifestations of a simpler thing.

Might there have been a point in time (long ago) where the “wave photon” and the “particle photon” seemed like possibly different things?

jiug•2 minutes ago
Even though "particle photon" and "wave photon" are used alternatively, they are just convenient ways of talking about the behavior of the same "photon field". The same way when we say "it is raining" we don't mean that there is a "it" that "rains", we should try avoid taking these descriptions too literally.

That being said, is difficult because we are using language to describe very-much-not-everyday stuff. We all need mental hooks to anchor new knowledge and most of our intuition is based on the classical (not-quantum) world aroud us.

jerf•30 minutes ago
You don't have to wonder, because they are. They're manifestations of fields.

I think it is a reasonable answer to tell people "if you're looking for the short list of simplest things, the number of types of fields there are is probably what you're looking for".

That doesn't invalidate this question in general, though the number of different answers from people looking at the same thing suggests it may be underspecified.

rwmj•13 minutes ago
To me that raises the opposite question, why are there so few fields? (Compared to what I'd imagine, infinite)

[Edit: I suppose I'm imagining waves or frequencies of waves, rather than fields, hence why in my imagination there would be an infinite variety]

Filligree•7 minutes ago
Not all fields interact with all other fields. You can think of them as a loosely coupled graph…

There might be any number of graph components with no connectivity to our fields at all, and we’d never know. Assuming, of course, that we’re including gravity in this logic.

There’s also might be any number of arbitrarily complex components which are only connected through gravity. That’s a decent candidate for what the dark sector actually is.

Noaidi•21 minutes ago
> They're manifestations of fields.

Or wave. Everything is a quantum wave.

https://www.vlatkovedral.com/everything-in-the-universe-is-a...

GroksBarnacles•7 minutes ago
A wave is already what we call a manifestation of a field, maybe I skimmed too quickly but I don't get the author's breakthrough point.
colejohnson66•37 minutes ago
That's what the various string theory proponents start from. There's "too many" different subatomic particles, so there surely must be something smaller that they're composed of?
Noaidi•18 minutes ago
How long can you break something apart until you cannot any longer? The things we are breaking apart are illusions in a sense. There will always be a smaller particle because that is what we are looking for.

When we understand that everything that we see is a manifestation of a probability wave, then we will understand everything is a wave and end these foolish experiments.

GroksBarnacles•5 minutes ago
Do you have a meaningful quantitative explanation with some math we can start building tech on, or will that require some... experiments?
krapp•16 minutes ago
I'll be sure to inform all of the physicists that @Noaidi on Hacker News has solved physics and that they can go home.
EwanG•about 1 hour ago
As usual, the hard problem is how you define "Elementary" which is why the posters always show 17, and then you get numbers that go as high as 995.5 (and the .5 is an interesting result as well).
warumdarum•about 1 hour ago
Some powerof two many actual states + a fractal deterministic random generator for particle Explorers?
Noaidi•29 minutes ago
There are no particles. Everything is a wave.

The Everything-Is-a-Quantum-Wave Interpretation of Quantum Physics

https://www.mdpi.com/2624-960X/5/2/31