Re: Do neutrinos really have masses?

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	sci.physics
Subject	Re: Do neutrinos really have masses?
Date	2015-12-29 11:50 -0600
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<n5uh5v$hvt$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(12 earlier) <n5u54r$j9d$1@speranza.aioe.org> <n5u5ev$j9d$2@speranza.aioe.org> <5b90c2b1-28c8-448e-b952-6fcdcf71dbb7@googlegroups.com> <n5udjt$87o$2@speranza.aioe.org> <0c95c9f9-9959-4ed7-b2f5-eb0d8544ee0d@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 12/29/2015 11:22 AM, Raymond Yohros wrote:
> On Tuesday, 29 December 2015 11:50:10 UTC-5, Odd Bodkin  wrote:
>> On 12/29/2015 10:45 AM, Raymond Yohros wrote:
>>> also the quark gluon plasma phenomena have add a lot to the knowledge
>>> of QCD and there are many unanswered questions on this observations.
>>> but like QM, it is more important to know the HOW before we know the WHY
>>> when it comes to empirical research
>>
>> I'm not sure what you're saying here. Please elaborate.
>>
>> My understanding is that the relationship between observation and theory
>> is a ratcheting exercise. Some observation, combined with pattern
>> recognition and the synthesis of disparate ideas, can lead to a theory.
>> Theory then tells you what observations to look for, to test the
>> predictions of the theory. If in that observation, you get a surprise,
>> then this suggests a new or revised theory.
>>
>
> well quantum mechanics is all based on empirical observations
> this observations seem to defy all common sense
> and most people don't understand the why at all
>
> Einstein had a lot of trouble with this
> he even lost an argument with Neil Bhor on the famous
> Copenhagen interpretation
>
> it is great if you imagine something that can be tested
> to be true but experiment always has the last word
> and the results help to eliminate all the mombo yombo
> people create most of the time

Well, I think there's a difference between saying that something is "not 
understood at all" and "understood to be much different than what we 
thought".

I think it helps to go back to Galileo who made the statement that 
things in motion will continue in motion FOREVER unless there is some 
force applied to change that motion. Up until then, people had taken the 
Aristotelean view that the natural state of things is at rest and that 
it takes a continuous application of an external impetus to keep things 
moving. The Aristotelean view was very much intuitive at the time, and 
Galileo's statement (which we know know as conservation of momentum or 
Newton's first law of motion) was probably very much counter to "logic".

But you see, it's been 400 years since Galileo, and in that time we have 
acquired a NEW intuition about motion that has absorbed conservation of 
momentum, and it no longer strikes us as counterintuitive. And in fact, 
when we see something slow down and come to rest, we no longer take the 
Aristotelean view that rest is the object's natural state; instead, we 
(correctly) account for the observation by referring to friction that 
slows the object down.

So, it's true that it's not been 400 years since the advent of quantum 
mechanics; it's only been about 80 years. (When Feynman wrote some 
comments about quantum mechanics and how nobody really understands it, 
it had only been around for about 35 years.) Nevertheless, I think it's 
now true that physicists have absorbed quantum mechanics into their 
intuition, so that what amateurs (like you and me) find unexplainable 
are in fact perfectly explainable with those newer intuitions. It just 
takes "practice in the mind" to make quantum mechanics more 
natural-feeling. I found that it was in fact easier to accept quantum 
mechanics when I started trying to explain EVERYTHING in a quantum 
mechanical way, leaving behind classical ideas. This isn't so hard, as 
it turns out, and it's a great calisthenic for flexing new intuition.

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Thread

Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-20 09:46 -0800
  Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-12-20 18:58 +0100
    Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-22 10:16 -0800
      Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2015-12-23 13:00 -0500
        Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-23 15:57 -0800
          Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2015-12-26 07:45 -0500
            Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-27 09:01 -0800
              Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-12-27 12:24 -0600
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-27 16:51 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-12-27 20:13 -0600
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-27 23:58 -0800
              Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2015-12-28 06:55 -0500
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-28 08:37 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2015-12-28 20:31 -0500
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 08:25 -0600
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 08:30 -0600
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-29 08:45 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 10:50 -0600
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-29 09:22 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 11:28 -0600
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-29 09:59 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 10:34 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 12:48 -0600
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-29 11:38 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 13:52 -0600
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 11:50 -0600
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-29 10:18 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 12:50 -0600
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-29 11:45 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 13:54 -0600
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-29 13:20 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 16:53 -0500
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 16:13 -0600
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-29 16:20 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 18:23 -0600
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 17:49 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? "Sam Jones" <invalid@example.com> - 2015-12-30 20:38 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 05:55 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-31 09:45 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 13:04 -0600
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 16:25 -0600
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-30 11:31 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 10:55 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 13:04 -0600
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? dobri karagorgov <dobrikarate.gov@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 11:24 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2015-12-30 09:14 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2015-12-30 09:53 -0500
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2015-12-30 09:49 -0500
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-29 08:11 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2015-12-30 11:40 -0500
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-31 08:35 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2015-12-31 16:11 -0500
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2015-12-31 14:34 -0800
                Re: Do neutrinos really have masses? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2016-01-01 02:57 -0500

csiph-web