Re: Why is there something?

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	sci.physics
Subject	Re: Why is there something?
Date	2017-08-15 13:00 -0500
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<omvcrg$vis$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(5 earlier) <4ae8fab6-a35c-4345-aac3-3738e91acc62@googlegroups.com> <oms5jo$94f$1@gioia.aioe.org> <af9caa37-2f61-4920-bd98-75c1173e6ca3@googlegroups.com> <oms9go$ek1$2@gioia.aioe.org> <832d25a3-0c2e-4605-9067-353f0d954c9e@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 8/14/17 9:06 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> On Monday, August 14, 2017 at 11:45:00 PM UTC+10, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> On 8/14/17 7:42 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
>>> On Monday, August 14, 2017 at 10:38:24 PM UTC+10, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>> Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, August 14, 2017 at 5:06:42 PM UTC+10, alal...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Monday, August 14, 2017 at 4:35:50 AM UTC+5:30, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/13/17 3:56 PM, alal65536@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> I didn't want to read the book, as last time I read a book on
>>>>>>>> cosmology, it wasted my time by discussing quarks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've asked you what evidence you have that everything about quarks has
>>>>>>> been fabricated. You've produced nothing, absolutely nothing. So is
>>>>>>> there a reason you believe what you do?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I may be lazy, but I am not a liar.  Over time, perhaps you will learn
>>>>>> to trust me.  How solid is the evidence you have seen on quarks?  How
>>>>>> reliant are you on other people?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Abhinav Lal
>>>>>> Writer & Investor
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>>>>
>>>>> Any theory worth anything must make valid predictions if that theory is
>>>>> to be considered scientific.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Which the theory of quarks does, many times over, verified in experiment
>>>> many times over.
>>>
>>> Really.
>>>
>>> Jet production in lepton and hadron colliders.
>>>
>>> Mumbo-jumbo.
>>
>> No, it's not mumbo-jumbo. It's perfectly understandable, even to lay
>> readers.
> 
> If it is perfectly understandable to lay readers then explain it in a few lines.
> 

Lay readers can read more than a few lines. This lay reader reads whole 
books on the subject. For recommendations about jet production in lepton 
colliders, I suggest:
Ferbel and Das: Introduction to Nuclear and Particle Physics
Martin and Shaw: Particle Physics
Perl: High Energy Hadron Physics
Perkins: Introduction to High Energy Physics

If you want it in a few lines, you're going to get a superficial 
explanation:
If there are internal constituents inside the proton, this is like 
having BBs inside a cloth bag. If you aim bullets at this bag, there is 
a measurable difference between hitting an undifferentiated bag and a 
bag with hard objects inside. This is called deep inelastic scattering. 
The measured results are consistent with the bag with hard objects 
inside. Moreover, the angular distribution of the scattered hard 
objects, and the energy spectrum of the scattered hard objects, both 
depend on the nature of the interaction between those constituents. QCD 
made firm predictions of what those spectra would look like -- 
QUANTITATIVELY -- and the results matched. Morever, the antiscreening of 
this interaction between the constituents predicted that some of the 
energy of the collision would go to the production of particles that 
"dress" the outgoing constituent, in a characteristic profile peaked 
around the constituent but extending into the angular region between the 
peaks, and this profile was also QUANTITATIVELY predicted. All of the 
quantitative predictions matched measurements, giving great confidence 
that the QCD model for the constituents is correct. There IS NO 
COMPETING MODEL that gets these QUANTITATIVE distributions correct. Nor 
do you even HAVE a QUANTITATIVE prediction for these distributions, just 
some qualitative handwaving.

For details and elaboration, refer to the books like a competent and 
genuinely interested lay reader would. Any other response is the 
hallmark of the cowardly or lazy.

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

Thread

Why is there something? alal65536@gmail.com - 2017-08-13 09:45 -0700
  Re: Why is there something? Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-13 12:20 -0500
    Re: Why is there something? poraty350@gmail.com - 2017-08-19 00:11 -0700
  Re: Why is there something? "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 10:22 -0700
    Re: Why is there something? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-08-13 12:07 -0700
  Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-13 11:20 -0700
    Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-13 12:23 -0700
      Re: Why is there something? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2017-08-13 14:07 -0700
        Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-13 22:27 -0700
      Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-14 11:46 -0700
        Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-15 11:45 -0700
          Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-15 13:17 -0700
            Re: Why is there something? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2017-08-15 13:48 -0700
              Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-15 16:27 -0700
                Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-15 16:33 -0700
    Re: Why is there something? alal65536@gmail.com - 2017-08-13 13:56 -0700
      Re: Why is there something? Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-13 16:21 -0500
      Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 18:05 -0500
        Re: Why is there something? alal65536@gmail.com - 2017-08-14 00:06 -0700
          Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 11:33 +0000
          Re: Why is there something? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 05:00 -0700
            Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 12:38 +0000
              Re: Why is there something? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 05:42 -0700
                Re: Why is there something? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 06:27 -0700
                Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 08:44 -0500
                Re: Why is there something? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 19:06 -0700
                Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 13:00 -0500
                Re: Why is there something? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 17:55 -0400
                Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-15 16:17 -0700
                Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 23:36 +0000
                Re: Why is there something? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 17:38 -0700
                Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 00:54 +0000
                Re: Why is there something? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 21:36 -0400
                Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-15 18:56 -0700
                Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 03:34 +0000
                Re: Why is there something? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-16 16:40 -0400
                Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 01:04 +0000
                Re: Why is there something? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-16 21:54 -0400
                Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 02:28 +0000
                Re: Why is there something? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-17 17:24 -0400
                Re: Why is there something? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 17:52 -0700
                Re: Why is there something? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 21:34 -0400
                Re: Why is there something? Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-15 21:25 -0500
                Re: Why is there something? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-16 16:38 -0400
                Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 03:34 +0000
                Re: Why is there something? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 08:14 -0700
                Re: Why is there something? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 21:24 -0400
                Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 01:30 +0000
          Re: Why is there something? Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-14 07:45 -0500
      Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-13 22:28 -0700
  Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 18:04 -0500
  Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. alal65536@gmail.com - 2017-08-13 17:25 -0700
    Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-13 21:02 -0500
    Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. KCIR2 <rick_s7777777@yahoo.ca> - 2017-08-14 07:17 -0700
      Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 19:13 -0700
        Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 18:00 -0400
          Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 15:38 -0700
            Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 19:29 -0400
              Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 17:37 -0700
                Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 21:41 -0400
                Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 18:56 -0700
              Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 17:41 -0700
                Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 21:33 -0400
                Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 18:53 -0700
  Re: Why is there something? KCIR2 <rick_s7777777@yahoo.ca> - 2017-08-13 17:36 -0700
  Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2017-08-14 10:02 +0000
  Re: Why is there something? "Anthony Zen Pride Week" <sender@hotmail.com> - 2017-08-16 07:13 -0700
    Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-16 07:29 -0700
      Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-16 17:30 -0700
  Re: Why is there something? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 20:42 -0700
    Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-17 22:49 -0700
      Re: Why is there something? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 08:14 -0700

csiph-web