Infinity Problems in QM



 Science > Physics > Infinity Problems in QM

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 1

1

 
Topic: Science > Physics
User: "G=EMC^2 Glazier"
Date: 09 Oct 2005 03:09:52 PM
Object: Infinity Problems in QM
We know QM is one of the most successful scientific theories of
humankind. Reality is it is the theory on which virtually all modern
science(physics) is based on. Like all theories its incomplete,and the
most troubling(big problem) Its quantum field theory predicted that
certain quantities,such as mass and charge of the electron were
"infinite"True Feynman got the Nobel because he found a way to subtract
these infinites out. Its called renomalization,and the theory that
results when the infinites are ruled out is called quantum
electrodynamics QED. I like a lot of others call it "Fudging"
What are your thoughts? Bert
.

User: ""

Title: Re: Infinity Problems in QM 10 Oct 2005 01:16:30 PM
G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:

Its quantum field theory predicted that certain quantities,
such as mass and charge of the electron were "infinite"

The problem of infinities is not in QED, but in the classical theory
which QED is the quantization of. Even Maxwell had to contend with the
issue, dedicating a section in his treatise to the issue.

True Feynman got the Nobel because he found a way to subtract
these infinites out.

Feynman did not subtract the infinities out. He came much later along;
it was a group from the time of world war II who did that.
Much of the theory that went into renormalization was, in fact, a close
parallel to Maxwell's resolution of the issue 80 years before and
encapsulates the essential elements (e.g. vacuum polarization, charge
screening, effective vs. bare charge) of his theory of the universal
dielectric.
.
User: "Autymn D. C."

Title: Re: Infinity Problems in QM 07 Nov 2005 06:53:08 PM
wrote:

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:

Its quantum field theory predicted that certain quantities,
such as mass and charge of the electron were "infinite"


The problem of infinities is not in QED, but in the classical theory
which QED is the quantization of. Even Maxwell had to contend with the
issue, dedicating a section in his treatise to the issue.

This is a lige. Classic theory predicts that finite mass yields finite
energy yields finite distance yields finite size. There are no
outcoming infinities. The "bare charge" is a obscurantist daydream to
explain the indeterminacies in the background energy, which is usually
unshielded because the EME interaction has "infinite" range from the
charges.
-Aut
.
User: ""

Title: Re: Infinity Problems in QM 08 Nov 2005 02:01:06 PM
Autymn D. C. wrote [with corrections and elaborations]:

The problem of infinities is not in QED, but in the classical theory
which QED is the quantization of. Even Maxwell had to contend with the
issue, dedicating a section in his treatise to the issue.

This [sic[ is a lige [that is, I, who have never read the actual treatise Maxwell wrote
am going to presume to tell someone who is well-known here as the most
knowledgeable of anyone in the present-day world on Maxwell's treatise, who even
transcribed an entirely new edition of the treatise on-line, that he is 'lying' about
what the classical theory expounded by Maxwell asserted, whether or how it
dealt with the infinities it asserted existed in the classical theory ... notwithstanding
the fact that the articles 50-85 address the issue in depth, including two sections
which are explicitly titled as such, addressing the problem of point and line
infinities. Such is the nature of my God-like omniscience that I can even presume
to argue facts against the #1 expert in the world on what Maxwell did and said;
and do so with such a clear and settled mind that I don't go off pounding and
on my keyboard in an uncontrolled emotional outburst as not to even
be able type straight enough to render a simple word like "lie" cleanly.]

.
User: "Autymn D. C."

Title: Re: Infinity Problems in QM 09 Nov 2005 03:07:26 AM
[sic[ -> [sic]
"lie" -> "lige"
I wasn't talking about Maxwell, cretin.
-Aut
.


User: ""

Title: Re: Infinity Problems in QM 09 Nov 2005 06:21:36 AM
Autymn D. C. wrote:

Classic theory predicts that finite mass yields finite
energy yields finite distance yields finite size. There are no
outcoming infinities.
-Aut

One over r squared goes to infinity at zero r.
We do not observe this behavior.
-Tim
.
User: "Timothy Golden http://www.BandTechnology.com"

Title: Re: Infinity Problems in QM 09 Nov 2005 06:40:01 AM
When a different tape measure is used the close distance infinity can
be removed.
When the traditional distance is transformed by 1 / ( x + 1 )
the result is unity at very close measures and zero at very far
measures.
One might liken this to a particle's perspective. What matters most are
things nearby, things far away are quite insignificant, or zero.
The Force equation for traditional charge forces then becomes:
F = q1 q2 ,
where discrete charge and distance have been bundled into one value.
This formula appears errant with the classical, but in the limit of
large x they do agree since 1 / x + 1 becomes 1 / x as x grows large.
This may also allow for self action or interaction since there is no
conflict when dealing with unity.
It's a different tape measure that simplifies the particle forces at
the expense of vector addition, which the tradition system handles very
nicely.
-Tim
.
User: "Autymn D. C."

Title: Re: Infinity Problems in QM 09 Nov 2005 07:39:22 AM
But your different "tape measure" doesn't make greater forces
meaningful if they show up, as it implies that the distance is less
than 0.
.
User: "Timothy Golden http://www.BandTechnology.com"

Title: Re: Infinity Problems in QM 09 Nov 2005 11:23:56 AM
I don't see any distances less than zero in this distance function.
Also, we have to be careful about nomenclature since you may be using
the traditional sense of distance. I think the way out of that is to
use the terms 'close' and 'far' which retain their meaning. Zero
distance in the reciprocal system is very far away, what used to be
infinity in the traditional sense. The new 'number line' looks like:
|--------------------|--------------------|--------------------|--------------------|--------------------|----->
0
1 1/2 1/3 1/4
1/5 1/6
where 1 is the origin. The measuring tape looks pretty similar to the
old one. It's impossible to get a negative distance on this tape.
There is another option of letting the origin become infinity, but
there you have an infinity again, which is what is so undesirable.
There's something nice about using unity as the origin. It's where you
are. It makes one not zero any more.
-Tim
.
User: "Timothy Golden http://www.BandTechnology.com"

Title: Re: Infinity Problems in QM 09 Nov 2005 09:12:09 PM
Oops. that number line is screwed up by text format.
|------|------|------|------|------|------|------> 0
1 1/2 1/3 1/4 1/5 1/6 1/7
Even this one will probably be messed up because I'm not in a fixed
font here.
.



User: "G=EMC^2 Glazier"

Title: Re: Infinity Problems in QM 09 Nov 2005 08:16:04 AM
Richard Feynman received his Nobel for getting rid of QM infinites. This
is called "renomalization." Reality is its hocus pocus math. Bert
.





User: "Sam Wormley"

Title: Re: Infinity Problems in QM 09 Oct 2005 09:55:29 PM
G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:

We know QM is one of the most successful scientific theories of
humankind. Reality is it is the theory on which virtually all modern
science(physics) is based on. Like all theories its incomplete,and the
most troubling(big problem) Its quantum field theory predicted that
certain quantities,such as mass and charge of the electron were
"infinite"True Feynman got the Nobel because he found a way to subtract
these infinites out. Its called renomalization,and the theory that
results when the infinites are ruled out is called quantum
electrodynamics QED. I like a lot of others call it "Fudging"
What are your thoughts? Bert

Paul Dirac... spent a good chunk of his life trying to find "better
equations" for quantum electrodynamics, without success.... kind of
like A. Einstein spending a good chunk of his life trying to unify
gravitation and electromagnetism.
Take solace, Herb, in the knowledge that QFT and GTR are tremendously
fruitful still, even though neither can be the theory of everything.
.


  Page 1 of 1

1

 


Related Articles
 

NEWER

pg.1612     pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER