3 wisecracks

[AntonioLao]

Before attempting to understand anything about a quantum field theory (QFT) for unifying quantum mechanics (QM) and general relativity (GR) there are 3 wisecracks carried over from QM as mental whipping boys in order to make any sense of its theoretical ramifications.

The first is to represent all physically observed objects as mathematical operators (contrasting Hadamard matrices). These can be a simple harmonic oscillator, position, or linear momentum. The second is the one and only uncertainty principle. The third is the non-commutative relation between conjugate operators.

As a surprise, there is also a 4th silent crack taken from special relativity (SR) that everyone is quite familiar with: E=mc². It this is transposed into m=E/c² then it says that with enough energy, mass can be created directly from the quantum vacuum field of the space-time continuum. Furthermore, the conservative laws allow an additional simultaneous creation of antiparticles which double the required energy input, 2E instead of just E. This clearly answered the question why classical kinetic energy needed a factor of ½ for all subluminal speeds: K.E.=½mv² where v<<c, the vacuum speed of light; and implying that no classical low energy antiparticles can be created. This also answers the question why only ordinary matter is found within the visible universe wherever and whenever opening a trivial box of surprising Cracker Jack.

[mkirkpatrick]

Sometimes Antonio there is a wise saying hidden within the cracker,can we but find it?




regards michael.

[AntonioLao]

In order to boost sale the U.S. manufacturer of Cracker Jack always promise to hide a surprise toy of practically no value inside the box. Is this wise or not only appear one sided and seem to be a way of openly stealing money from the kids.

[Profpat]

The second is the one and only uncertainty principle.

I like this one to me it gives particles and therefore us limited freedom.

Try 3 fortune cookies Michael.

[AntonioLao]

The uncertainty remains whether it is a particle or a wave that is the dominant object of reality?

[Profpat]

The uncertainty remains whether it is a particle or a wave that is the dominant object of reality?

As for me I'm a particle that can wave. I thought that it was in the measurement of position ( particle ) or momentum ( Wave ). It's been determined that they a both a particle and a wave, right?

[Profpat]

[AntonioLao]

That is correct. Only a particle has position and a wave a spreadout envelope of momentum density as the Gaussian normal continuous distribution of probability theory.

[Profpat]

I like probability theory also. If probability theory is correct doesn't that mean the universe IS NOT DETERMINISTIC, and again implies there is freedom out there. Is that the same as " Degree of Freedom" ?

[AntonioLao]

In QFT there are infinite degrees of freedom for continuous field but once the field is quantized or the same as saying becoming a particle then its dof are reduced to finite degrees. For zero mass particles such as photon and graviton there must be exactly 8 degrees of freedom as 8 properties of directional invariance.