[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by neutralino

But the multiplicative inverse of a rational a/b is the rational b/a...?

Thanks. I got ahead of myself what I meant is that the elements of a matrix (Hadamard) can only be made up of 1 and -1. These are rationals but more restrictive they are integers of both positive and negative. If you look at Pauli spin matrices the elements can be complex and irrational and that there are a lot of the number pi. Furthermore there are more zeros than what pleases the ordinary person and of course there are plenty of unity.

[Profpat]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao

What I dont understand is that why researchers keep using them? The latest are the phase factors of wave functions in Schroedinger's and Dirac equations of quantum field theories.

If you can eliminate the need for imaginary numbers Antonio, could you also eliminate those bothersome virtual particles and dimensionless points?

Best,

Pat

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by Profpat

those bothersome virtual particles and dimensionless points

thanks for your suggestion. However, to eliminate virtual particles they must remain dimensionless. On the other hand to eliminate dimensionless points is simply to eliminate everything physical. Remember that physical dimensions such as kilograms for mass, meters for length, and second for time all become dimensionless when taken ratios with themselves. An example, the ratio of the mass of the proton to the electron is a dimensionless number approximately 1836.

Along the same reasoning, one dimensional physical quantities is speed as length/time but in theory of relativity, length and time are combined as space-time. So, in certain respect the speed of light is also a dimensionless quantity.

[Profpat]

Hi Antonio;

Thinking about it the mathematical point has to be dimensionless.

I have another question that you may or may not know the answer to. If the neutron has a mass of ~1839 and the proton has a mass of ~1836 and the electron a mass of 1, what happened to the missing mass of ~2? Is it energy? I know it's not the neutrino, though that may be a slight portion of the missing mass. Being an accountant I would like to account for all the mass.

Best to you Antonio,

Pat

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by Profpat

what happened to the missing mass of ~2?

The missing mass was carried away by the momentum of the decay process of the neutron known as beta decay and since momentum is conserved there are two reflective branches of the momentum path. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_decay

You have to be a nuclear physicist to give a detail accounting of all possible interactions of this beta decay process. Since nuclear processes follow the law of averages as a statistical analysis.

[Profpat]

Thanks Antonio;

I will be able to sleep again knowing everything in the universe is accounted for. and that there is no imbalance.

Best to you,

Pat

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by Profpat

there is no imbalance

Dirac's discovery of antimatter in the 1930s led to our modern concern about the imbalance of matter and antimatter. Cosmologists could not find them (antimatter).

[Profpat]

That would be the asymmetrical universe at the big bang, I take it. Neutralino gave me a little assurance when he stated there was ~ 200 million photons for every proton as I recall. Most of the matter and anti matter was apparently annhilated at the beginning thus producing a proponderance of photons.

Could the antimatter be hiding somewhere in our universe?. I believe they actually created antimatter in the lab.

Best to you Antonio, and thank you for your help.

Pat

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by Profpat

Could the antimatter be hiding somewhere in our universe

The universe is transparent to electromagnetic waves therefore it is impossible for antimatter to hide anywhere unless the walls are made of weakly interacting massive particles WIMPs.

[Profpat]

Would it be possible for an antimatter parallel universe, like the one RP and I suggested a while back?