Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Why quantum physics is a WASTE OF TIME


  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

#41 Sensei

Sensei

    Scientist

  • Senior Members
  • 3,038 posts

Posted 21 August 2016 - 08:08 PM

Proton-rich isotopes can decay by electron capture. And release neutrino (to conserve lepton number).

https://en.wikipedia...lectron_capture

 

But daughter isotope (just nucleus) must have smaller mass-energy, than parent isotope (nucleus), to conserve energy properly.

In the case of lone proton and electron, there is missing 0.782 MeV mass-energy.

Because free neutron has 939.565 MeV/c^2, proton has 938.272 MeV/c^2 and electron has 0.511 MeV/c^2 mass.

938.272 MeV/c^2 + 0.511 MeV/c^2 - 939.565 MeV/c^2 = -0.782 MeV/c^2

Negative means disallowed/missing energy. If it would be >0, such decay mode would be at least plausible.


Edited by Sensei, 21 August 2016 - 10:09 PM.

  • 0

#42 bimbo36

bimbo36

    Baryon

  • Senior Members
  • 124 posts

Posted 21 August 2016 - 09:36 PM

thanks for the information's ...

 

^_^


  • 0

#43 blue89

blue89

    Molecule

  • Senior Members
  • 415 posts

Posted 1 September 2016 - 10:43 AM

Quantum physics is becoming really popular on TV and other media, mainly b/c it has the potential to offer so much, but in reality provides so little.

Sure, I can tediously calculate all the electrons on my computer screen, or explain why benzene is a stable ring due to its orbitals. But at the end of the day, these don't really save or help anyone or anything.

Yes, I'm aware of the things physics has given us such as the atom bomb, etc. However, once we start talking about string theory and 5th, 6th, and 7th dimensions and so on...why does this matter, and what does this do?

if you look at the most beneficial achievements to human kind in the last 100 yrs..it's been mostly in biology, chemistry, and engineering (including computer engineering). I don't see how understanding the spin of a quark is ever going to advance human kind.

 

(P.S. we will never approach the speed of light)

 

/end rant

 

~EE

 

as I understand ,you criticize the theoritic studies at the background of this text. I also critize this. but here is clearly important detail ,I think theoritic studies are not empty or valueless.

theoritic studies  only need perspective approach.


Edited by blue89, 1 September 2016 - 10:49 AM.

  • 0

#44 Iwikefactz

Iwikefactz

    Quark

  • New Members
  • 20 posts

Posted 20 October 2016 - 01:30 PM

Oh how I love the irony of this post.


  • 1

#45 seriously disabled

seriously disabled

    Baryon

  • Senior Members
  • 477 posts

Posted 26 October 2016 - 03:53 PM

Theoretical physics is not good career choice in my opinion.

 

Most of the theories of mainstream theoretical physics like quantum mechanics, special relativity, general relativity, quantum field theory and modern cosmology are highly mathematical and theoretical and they can be quite difficult for most people to understand, unless you are very gifted at mathematics of course and have very very good memory.

 

Biology, chemistry, engineering (electrical engineering, computer engineering, mechanical engineering, civil engineering or electronics engineering for example) or economics/social science are better career choices in my opinion because these fields are much less difficult to master than theoretical physics and requite less effort, money and time to be really good at.

 

Theoretical physicists don't make a lot of money but this field requires tons of effort and money to be really good at (for normal people I mean and not geniuses or prodigies) and is in my opinion not worth the money and effort which could be spent on something else.


Edited by seriously disabled, 26 October 2016 - 03:58 PM.

  • 0

#46 swansont

swansont

    Evil Liar (or so I'm told)

  • Moderators
  • 35,464 posts
  • LocationWashington DC region

Posted 26 October 2016 - 04:06 PM

Theoretical physics is not good career choice in my opinion.

 

 

 

That's not what the OP was discussing.


  • 0

Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum          To go to the fortress of ultimate darkness, click the up arrow ^

I am not a minimum-wage government shill.             Forget it, Jake — it's Crackpottown.

My SFN blog: Swans on Tea                                                           

 

 

                                                                                                                     

 

 


#47 Strange

Strange

    SuperNerd

  • Senior Members
  • 11,589 posts
  • Location珈琲店

Posted 26 October 2016 - 04:54 PM

Theoretical physics is not good career choice in my opinion.

 

 

It is, if it is what you want to do.


  • 2

#48 Tahir Gorgen

Tahir Gorgen

    Quark

  • Senior Members
  • 44 posts

Posted 22 December 2016 - 08:15 PM

I lost my feelings for physic to. I understood so mutch more but cannot maynot explain tell.

Modarator this is ontopic.

I got in an discussion in Holland. I aimed that the universe is far more than 1000billion light year wide and proved it at the end.

.......... imagine each one is a spot of the hubble extreem deep photo. 13,3b ly far. Btw i could put the sun at a distance of 13,3 billion ly far and aim the same.

I saw many galaxys on that photo and had the thougth that it would have a wide of +/-100million ly wide. One photo. One spot that is entlargent by a telescope. How many of that spots can we put next to each other in our sight, if we look above? Say 4m broath.. 10.000 (hubble extreem deep photo spots in broath/wide)? Times 100million ly wide? The question can also be asked as how wide is the universe

I know a lot in physics, but I am not an physician. I discovered so mutch more because I loved it. But can't tell all. Because I see and saw what is made up and where you/they wrong whit and of course there is crowdfunding. They make money and I have to shut upp and starfe from the hunger. Didn't have any benefit of all.
  • -1

#49 swansont

swansont

    Evil Liar (or so I'm told)

  • Moderators
  • 35,464 posts
  • LocationWashington DC region

Posted 22 December 2016 - 08:19 PM

I lost my feelings for physic to. I understood so mutch more but cannot maynot explain tell.
Modarator this is ontopic.


I'm not convinced you understand the meaning of the phrase. The topic here is QM, not cosmology.
  • 1

Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum          To go to the fortress of ultimate darkness, click the up arrow ^

I am not a minimum-wage government shill.             Forget it, Jake — it's Crackpottown.

My SFN blog: Swans on Tea                                                           

 

 

                                                                                                                     

 

 


#50 _Rick_

_Rick_

    Quark

  • Senior Members
  • 37 posts

Posted 24 December 2016 - 06:03 AM

There's a difference between entertainment and reality why does that annoy you
  • 0

Mathematics knows no races or geographic boundaries; for mathematics, the cultural world is one country. - David Hilbert


#51 RiceAWay

RiceAWay

    Meson

  • Senior Members
  • 92 posts

Posted 19 January 2017 - 12:25 AM

 

Ironic that you post this using a device that is only possible because of our knowledge of quantum physics ...

 

 

We are already travelling at over 99.99% of the speed of light (relative to something).

 

Why you know - I didn't know that Benjamin Franklin was a quantum physicist. I can't think of a single improvement in the art of electronic engineering due to any of the wild guesses of quantum physics beyond the existence of the electron.

 

As for your other ridiculous statement - prove it. While the speeds of atoms or subatomic particles accelerating into a black hole may approach the speed of light that is theoretical since the only proof we have of the existence of black holes is conjecture due to hypothetical gravity fields. And due to the relationship of mass it would be the subatomic particles going near the speed of light in relationship to the rest of the universe and not us to them.


Even if quantum physics is a waste of time, so what? Peoples' time is theirs to waste and there is no end of works that don't 'benefit' humanity. Knitting doilies comes to mind. Damnable doily knitters anyway! No skin off my shins.

 

And this is the way I see it as well. Though you must admit that Dr. Hawkings is rather up a tree seeing his life's work go up in smoke with the discovery of particles that do not fit his standard models.


Sorry, your view that qm doesn't help people is jest false. Walk into a hospital and turn off every device with a micro controller or CPU and head watch as not only do patients suffer immediately but no one can be easily summoned to help them. This is one of the worst arguments against qm research I've ever seen, and frankly that's saying something.

Where ever did you get that idea? Neal's Bohr is given the honor of really being the first quantum physicist (though others are often given credit). But we did not need ANY knowledge of the fact that there were electrons to use electricity. Certainly Edison used cut and try. Nikola Tesla was an engineer and the modern world turns arounds his inventions.

 

While William Shockley invented the transistor that had absolutely NOTHING to do with the subsequent growth of IC's. That was a logical extension of Shockley's invention and the transistor could just as well come from some chemist somewhere playing with methods to identify materials. We need not know that electrons protons or neutrons exist until the Manhattan Project.

 

Do NOT give excessive credit to any physicist anywhere when we know that most of this world's present condition is from people that had little to no idea of what they were doing. Physicists EXPLAINED them afterwards. 


  • -5

#52 Strange

Strange

    SuperNerd

  • Senior Members
  • 11,589 posts
  • Location珈琲店

Posted 19 January 2017 - 12:49 AM

 

Why you know - I didn't know that Benjamin Franklin was a quantum physicist. I can't think of a single improvement in the art of electronic engineering due to any of the wild guesses of quantum physics beyond the existence of the electron.

 

 

OK. So you don't know how transistors work. Feel free to ask some questions in a new thread.

 

 

 

As for your other ridiculous statement - prove it.

 

There are trillions of neutrinos passing through you every second. They are moving at pretty close to the speed of light.

http://ase.tufts.edu...apter.asp?id=37


While William Shockley invented the transistor that had absolutely NOTHING to do with the subsequent growth of IC's. That was a logical extension of Shockley's invention and the transistor could just as well come from some chemist somewhere playing with methods to identify materials. 

 

 

The transistor was designed based on knowledge of semiconductor physics (i.e. quantum theory). 


 

 

Though you must admit that Dr. Hawkings ...

 

Five points on the Crackpot Index, right there.


  • 2

#53 Sensei

Sensei

    Scientist

  • Senior Members
  • 3,038 posts

Posted 19 January 2017 - 04:37 AM

Why you know - I didn't know that Benjamin Franklin was a quantum physicist. I can't think of a single improvement in the art of electronic engineering due to any of the wild guesses of quantum physics beyond the existence of the electron.

 
1. Smoke detector is using radioactive isotope of Americium-241 produced in nuclear reactors..
https://en.wikipedia...i/Americium-241
(see applications section)
 
2. Laser
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser
(and as a consequence CD/DVD/Blu-ray, Laser Distance Meters, etc. etc.)
 
3. LED (light emitting diode)
https://en.wikipedia...-emitting_diode
(and as a consequence LCD/LED/OLED screens etc. etc.)
 
4. photo elements.
photodiode https://en.wikipedia...wiki/Photodiode
phototransistor
photoresistor https://en.wikipedia...i/Photoresistor
 
5. Solar panels
https://en.wikipedia...iki/Solar_panel
 
6. Geiger counter
https://en.wikipedia.../Geiger_counter
 
7. Decay of Plutonium-238 is used in RTG (Radioisotope thermoelectric generator) to create electricity for satellites flying in cosmos too far from the Sun to be able to use its energy.
https://en.wikipedia...i/Plutonium-238
https://en.wikipedia...ctric_generator

Just a few examples, in random order of importance..

While the speeds of atoms or subatomic particles accelerating into a black hole may approach the speed of light that is theoretical since the only proof we have of the existence of black holes is conjecture due to hypothetical gravity fields.

 

If you look at center of our galaxy, you will see that stars are orbiting around nothing visible (in visible spectrum)..


Edited by Sensei, 19 January 2017 - 03:59 AM.

  • 2

#54 Acme

Acme

    Primate

  • Senior Members
  • 2,345 posts

Posted 19 January 2017 - 04:52 AM

Even if quantum physics is a waste of time, so what? Peoples' time is theirs to waste and there is no end of works that don't 'benefit' humanity. Knitting doilies comes to mind. Damnable doily knitters anyway! No skin off my shins.

 
And this is the way I see it as well. Though you must admit that Dr. Hawkings is rather up a tree seeing his life's work go up in smoke with the discovery of particles that do not fit his standard models.

Boy, you had to go back a ways to find that quote. :lol: As the old saying goes, if you see a theoretical physicist in a wheel chair up a tree, you know he didn't get there by himself.
  • 1

#55 Strange

Strange

    SuperNerd

  • Senior Members
  • 11,589 posts
  • Location珈琲店

Posted 19 January 2017 - 09:38 AM

Though you must admit that Dr. Hawkings is rather up a tree seeing his life's work go up in smoke with the discovery of particles that do not fit his standard models.

 

 

1. Hawking not Hawkings

 

2. What particles are those, that do not fit the standard model?

 

3. Stephen Hawking is a cosmologist and expert in expert in general relativity, not a particle physicist, so it is not "his" standard model.


  • 2

#56 BenSCBSc

BenSCBSc

    Quark

  • Members
  • 10 posts

Posted 10 February 2017 - 07:28 PM

 
1. Smoke detector is using radioactive isotope of Americium-241 produced in nuclear reactors..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americium-241[/url]
(see applications section)
 
2. Laser
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser[/url]
(and as a consequence CD/DVD/Blu-ray, Laser Distance Meters, etc. etc.)
 
3. LED (light emitting diode)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-emitting_diode[/url]
(and as a consequence LCD/LED/OLED screens etc. etc.)
 
4. photo elements.
photodiode https://en.wikipedia...wiki/Photodiode[/url]
phototransistor
photoresistor https://en.wikipedia...i/Photoresistor[/url]
 
5. Solar panels
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_panel[/url]
 
6. Geiger counter
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geiger_counter[/url]
 
7. Decay of Plutonium-238 is used in RTG (Radioisotope thermoelectric generator) to create electricity for satellites flying in cosmos too far from the Sun to be able to use its energy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonium-238[/url]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator[/url]

Just a few examples, in random order of importance..

 
If you look at center of our galaxy, you will see that stars are orbiting around nothing visible (in visible spectrum)..

 
Why you know - I didn't know that Benjamin Franklin was a quantum physicist. I can't think of a single improvement in the art of electronic engineering due to any of the wild guesses of quantum physics beyond the existence of the electron.
 
As for your other ridiculous statement - prove it. While the speeds of atoms or subatomic particles accelerating into a black hole may approach the speed of light that is theoretical since the only proof we have of the existence of black holes is conjecture due to hypothetical gravity fields. And due to the relationship of mass it would be the subatomic particles going near the speed of light in relationship to the rest of the universe and not us to them.

 
And this is the way I see it as well. Though you must admit that Dr. Hawkings is rather up a tree seeing his life's work go up in smoke with the discovery of particles that do not fit his standard models.

Where ever did you get that idea? Neal's Bohr is given the honor of really being the first quantum physicist (though others are often given credit). But we did not need ANY knowledge of the fact that there were electrons to use electricity. Certainly Edison used cut and try. Nikola Tesla was an engineer and the modern world turns arounds his inventions.
 
While William Shockley invented the transistor that had absolutely NOTHING to do with the subsequent growth of IC's. That was a logical extension of Shockley's invention and the transistor could just as well come from some chemist somewhere playing with methods to identify materials. We need not know that electrons protons or neutrons exist until the Manhattan Project.
 
Do NOT give excessive credit to any physicist anywhere when we know that most of this world's present condition is from people that had little to no idea of what they were doing. Physicists EXPLAINED them afterwards. 

To continue the list
8.understanding the mechanics of the Sun and other stars
9.NMR, fMRI and other medical scanning equipment
10. Electron microscope
11. Telescopes (outside visible spectrum)
12. Just about every electronic device you can think of.
13. Water purification
14.cancer treatments
I can go on and on but I think the point has been made.
  • 1

#57 Thorham

Thorham

    Atom

  • Senior Members
  • 369 posts

Posted 10 February 2017 - 08:13 PM

I can go on and on but I think the point has been made.

 

Not to mention that not knowing anything about the world around us and being stuck in the stone age simply isn't acceptable.


  • 0

#58 BenSCBSc

BenSCBSc

    Quark

  • Members
  • 10 posts

Posted 11 February 2017 - 12:08 PM

 

Not to mention that not knowing anything about the world around us and being stuck in the stone age simply isn't acceptable.

Quite and very well stated. I have had this argument before with a 'physicist', or so he claimed? I can kind of understand why people might want to dismiss quantum mechanics as being irrelevant. Having a classical understanding of the universe works on the macro scale for harmonic motion, velocity, mass etc and one can consider oneself educated on the natural world, but then somebody goes and throws quantum mechanics into the mix and you know nothing anymore, you've been relegated to the learners bench again. So instead of learning what is a hard and complex subject, it is easier to disclaim it as theoretical and purposeless.

I think that if people that already understand Newtonian mechanics, took a look at qm they would be surprised that it isn't completely out of reach, it just takes a bit of hard work and some effort. In fact some of it is simpler than the classical stuff. At least everything is quantised and so is all just multiples of the same thing! 


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users