It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
We need to understand that present quantum theory uses entirely different standards of logic than does the rest of science.In biology or medicine, if we note that an effect E (for example, muscle contraction, phototropism, and digestion of protein) does not occur unless a condition C (nerve impulse, light, and pepsin) is present, it seems natural to infer that C is a necessary causative agent for E. Most of what is known in all fields of science has resulted from following up this kind of reasoning. But suppose that condition C does not always lead to effect E; what further inferences should a scientist draw? At this point the reasoning formats of biology and quantum theory diverge sharply.In the biological sciences one takes it for granted that in addition to C there must be some other causative factor F, not yet identified. One searches for it, tracking down the assumed cause by a process of elimination of possibilities that is sometimes extremely tedious. But persistence pays off; over and over again medically important and intellectually impressive success has been achieved, the conjectured unknown causative factor being finally identified as a definite chemical compound. Most enzymes, vitamins, viruses, and other biologically active substances owe their discovery to this reasoning process.In quantum theory, one does not reason in this way.Physics of ‘Random Experiments’, see section titled But What About Quantum Theory?
Many different physical ideas can describe the same physical reality. Thus, classical electrodynamics can be described by a field view, or an action at a distance view, etc. Originally, Maxwell filled space with idler wheels, and Faraday with fields lines, but somehow the Maxwell equations themselves are pristine and independent of the elaboration of words attempting a physical description. The only true physical description is that describing the experimental meaning of the quantities in the equation - or better, the way the equations are to be used in describing experimental observations. This being the case perhaps the best way to proceed is to try to guess equations, and disregard physical models or descriptions. For example, McCullough guessed the correct equations for light propagation in a crystal long before his colleagues using elastic models could make head or tail of the phenomena, or again, Dirac obtained his equation for the description of the electron by an almost purely mathematical proposition. A simple physical view by which all the contents of this equation can be seen is still lacking.Therefore, I think equation guessing might be the best method to proceed to obtain the laws for the part of physics which is presently unknown.
Yet, when I was much younger, I tried this equation guessing and I have seen many students try this, but it is very easy to go off in wildly incorrect and impossible directions.
The complicated structure which he attributed to the ether rendered his system strange and unattractive; one seemed to be reading the description of a workshop with gearing, with rods transmitting motion and bending under the effort, with wheels, belts and governors.Whatever may be the taste of the English for conceptions of this kind, whose concrete appearance appeals to them, Maxwell was the first to abandon his own extraordinary theory, and it does not appear in his complete works.
In the Prisoner's Dilemma game, two individuals can each either cooperate or defect. The payoff to a player is in terms of the effect on its fitness (survival and fecundity). No matter what the other does, the selfish choice of defection yields a higher payoff than cooperation. But if both defect, both do worse than if both had cooperated.
The most general displacement of a rigid body can be obtained by first translating the body, and then rotating it about a line. Moreover, the line about which the rotation takes place can be so chosen, that the motion of translation is parallel to this line.This combination of a translation and a rotation round a line parallel to the direction of translation is called a screw; the ratio of the distance of translation to the angle of rotation is called the pitch of the screw. It is clear that in a screw displacement, the order in which the translation and rotation take place is indifferent.
Toward the end of the interview, we asked Tesla which arena of science most appealed to him. While we expected him to mention radios and airplanes, the world wireless system, it was not the induction motor; instead it was the discovery of the principle that preceded the induction motor, the “rotating magnetic field”. Tesla answered: “rotating magnetic fields were dear to my heart. When I made the discovery of the rotating magnetic field, I was a very young man. The revelation came after years of concentrated thought and it was my first great thrill. It was not only a valuable discovery capable of extensive practical applications. It was a revelation of new forces and new phenomena unknown to science before”. “No”, Dr. Tesla said with some feelings, “I would not give my rotating field discovery for a thousand inventions, however valuable, designed merely as mechanical contraption to deceive the eye and ear!” Then saying: “A thousand years hence, the telephone and the motion picture camera may be obsolete, but the principle of the rotating magnetic field will remain a vital, living thing for all time to come.”