-
Posts
4 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by pablo d
-
-
If the masses of the particles were really coming from the vibrations of the string then they would either all be massless, or have masses of the Planck scale
I thought that string theory started a particle off with having the planck mass, and then via quantum fluctuations most of that mass is cancelled out, leaving the remainder as the total mass.
Also - and sorry for being another pest in this thread - but how exactly does the Standard Model of particle physics determine *why* particles have the mass they do. I was under the impression that the SM just takes these arbitrary values as a given and basically ignores the underlying reason, or am I wrong
0 -
When something is in an orbit, gravity and acceleration kind of cancel each other - hence weightlessness. I think the equivalence principle says that such a frame is in fact an inertial frame so that SR applies.
But if you've two things rotating around each other wouldn't this present a similar situation as a giant circular spacestation with artificial gravity?
0 -
Let the observer and the spaceship be in the same orbit around a point mass. Let them be on diametrically opposite sides. The orbital velocity is v. Since both of them are in orbit, they are intertial frames and SR applies - by Einstein's Equivalence Principle.
If they are in orbit around something, doesn't that introduce acceleration and thus wouldn't GR apply instead?
0
The Bohm Interpretation
in Quantum Theory
Posted
I assume you're already conversant on the subject but from my limited understanding I believe that the transactional interpretation comes to some of the same conclusions as Bohm's interpretation, all without directly positing non-locality - I like it as an interpretation because I abhor both the many-worlds interpretation and non-locality (except as a hypothetical means to an end, but how satisfying is that eh?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_interpretation
http://www.npl.washington.edu/npl/int_rep/tiqm/TI_toc.html
It requires a little mental gymnastics to understand what it means for wavefunction collapse, but that might just be me, I don't have the capacity to articulate it in a coherent manner sorry, but just thought I'd post the links to you just in case you're interested