Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.physics > #497477 > unrolled thread

Re: QED and QM Reality

Started bySam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
First post2015-06-03 07:00 -0500
Last post2015-06-03 10:07 -0700
Articles 4 — 3 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: QED and QM Reality Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-06-03 07:00 -0500
    Re: QED and QM Reality "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-06-03 09:27 -0700
      Re: QED and QM Reality Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-06-03 11:38 -0500
        Re: QED and QM Reality Enomis Skating <anomis.edenomis@libero.it> - 2015-06-03 10:07 -0700

#497477 — Re: QED and QM Reality

FromSam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
Date2015-06-03 07:00 -0500
SubjectRe: QED and QM Reality
Message-ID<5oidneaKcZDEcfPInZ2dnUU7-RmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
On 6/2/15 4:47 PM, reber g=emc^2 wrote:
> Sam I want to jump in here to say that my scientific reasoning is not based on math.

   Then you would be wrong, Herb, as all physical theories are
   mathematical. Nature seems to me a mathematician.

-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion
of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related
social issues.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#497552

From"reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com>
Date2015-06-03 09:27 -0700
Message-ID<518a129a-05a4-462b-a0fa-096f7e3812d1@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#497477
On Wednesday, June 3, 2015 at 5:00:27 AM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 6/2/15 4:47 PM, reber g=emc^2 wrote:
> > Sam I want to jump in here to say that my scientific reasoning is not based on math.
> 
>    Then you would be wrong, Herb, as all physical theories are
>    mathematical. Nature seems to me a mathematician.
> 
> -- 
> 
> sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion
> of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related
> social issues.

Sam Fermi Put lab results over math.Feynman's diagrams took the place of math and gave us pictures of atomic actions.All this is good enough for me. I do believe nature measures things right,and that gave me my "Time Lapse Theory".Nobel thinking . O ya TreBert 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#497555

FromSam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
Date2015-06-03 11:38 -0500
Message-ID<5oidnQyKcZD3sPLInZ2dnUU7-RmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#497552
On 6/3/15 11:27 AM, reber g=emc^2 wrote:
> Sam Fermi Put lab results over math.


   No--Fermi did not give up on the Law of Conservation of Energy.
   Neutrinos had not been discovered yes, but Fermi did not give up
   on the mathematics.


-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion
of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related
social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#497561

FromEnomis Skating <anomis.edenomis@libero.it>
Date2015-06-03 10:07 -0700
Message-ID<401770ca-f6da-4106-8f83-7ce35dfceeaf@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#497555
Il giorno mercoledì 3 giugno 2015 18:38:05 UTC+2, Sam Wormley ha scritto:
> On 6/3/15 11:27 AM, reber g=emc^2 wrote:
> > Sam Fermi Put lab results over math.
> 
> 
>    No--Fermi did not give up on the Law of Conservation of Energy.

Not only energy, also linear and angular momenta.

>    Neutrinos had not been discovered yes, but Fermi did not give up
>    on the mathematics.

He didn't discover new math stuff, he made the necessary calculations.
That Physics and other sciences need math should be obvious.
IMO he has the merit to think that those conservation laws could 
not have been violated, so the neutrino inspiration took place.

regards
Angelo

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web