Do we really have the “jewel” of physics?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-09-2016, 08:55 PM (This post was last modified: 19-09-2016 01:13 AM by theBorg.)
Question Do we really have the “jewel” of physics?
Quote from Wikipedia 2016:
Quote:Quantum electrodynamics.... Richard Feynman called it "the jewel of physics" for its extremely accurate predictions ... the presence of diverging integrals having no mathematical meaning. To overcome this difficulty, a technique called renormalization has been devised, producing finite results .... theory being meaningful after renormalization is that the number of diverging diagrams is finite... quantum electrodynamics displaying just three diverging diagrams.

So, the renormalization has not removed all the infinities from QED??? How then the Richard says, what QED is extremely accurate??? The theoretically the QED is a monster, but practically – “jewel”. In fact, the infinities remained:

Wikipedia:
Quote:An argument by Freeman Dyson shows that the radius of convergence of the perturbation series in QED is zero... From a modern perspective, we say that QED is not well defined as a quantum field theory to arbitrarily high energy. The coupling constant runs to infinity at finite energy, signalling a Landau pole. The problem is essentially that QED appears to suffer from quantum triviality issues.

So, the Richard Feynman was not objective. The renormalization removes the infinities from the theory. The infinities are not completely removed. Conclusion: there is no single Quantum Theory of Field, which would be renormalized, and even quantized. So, theoretically, we have no Quantum Theory of Field. Please go along the path of the David Bohm's theory of Quantum Physics. Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-09-2016, 10:03 PM
RE: Do we really have the “jewel” of physics?
Cue the latest installment of Dribble Bib Theater.

(18-09-2016 08:55 PM)theBorg Wrote:  Quote from Wikipedia 2016:
“Quantum electrodynamics.... Richard Feynman called it "the jewel of physics" for its extremely accurate predictions ... the presence of diverging integrals having no mathematical meaning. To overcome this difficulty, a technique called renormalization has been devised, producing finite results .... theory being meaningful after renormalization is that the number of diverging diagrams is finite... quantum electrodynamics displaying just three diverging diagrams.”

If you are going to copy-N-paste straight from Wikipedia try and at least keep the quote intact. Chopping it up like this obscurs what little meaning you might have had.

Quote:So, the renormalization has not removed all the infinities from QED??? How then the Richard says, what QED is extremely accurate???

Wrong. What the wikipedia entry says is:

Quote:Higher order terms can be straightforwardly computed for the evolution operator but these terms display diagrams containing the following simpler ones that, being closed loops, imply the presence of diverging integrals having no mathematical meaning. To overcome this difficulty, a technique called renormalization has been devised, producing finite results in very close agreement with experiments. It is important to note that a criterion for theory being meaningful after renormalization is that the number of diverging diagrams is finite. In this case the theory is said to be renormalizable. The reason for this is that to get observables renormalized one needs a finite number of constants to maintain the predictive value of the theory untouched. This is exactly the case of quantum electrodynamics displaying just three diverging diagrams.

Translation: If you have an infinite number of closed loops you can't renormalize the theory and it's useless. QED has just three closed loops so renormalization works quite nicely.

Quote:An argument by Freeman Dyson shows that the radius of convergence of the perturbation series in QED is zero... From a modern perspective, we say that QED is not well defined as a quantum field theory to arbitrarily high energy.

Oh noes! The theory has limitations! Run for the hills!

Quote:So, the Richard Feynman was not objective. The renormalization removes the infinities from the theory. The infinities are not completely removed. Conclusion: there is no single Quantum Theory of Field, which would be renormalized, and even quantized. So, theoretically, we have no Quantum Theory of Field. Please go along the path of the David Bohm's theory of Quantum Physics. Thank you.

Wrong. What it says is that we have no Theory of Everything. That'll be big headlines. QED doesn't work at high energies but within its limitations it does the job quite nicely. Know how your tools work and you won't get broken answers.

And for the love of all that's unholy please stop dribbling troll shit on everything.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Paleophyte's post
19-09-2016, 01:18 AM
RE: Do we really have the “jewel” of physics?
(18-09-2016 10:03 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  QED has just three closed loops so renormalization works quite nicely.
Let me insert the missing words:
Quote:AFTER THE RENORMALIZATION the QED STILL has "just" three INFINITE INTEGRALS FOR THE closed loops so renormalization DOES NOT workED OUT quite nicely.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2016, 01:37 AM
RE: Do we really have the “jewel” of physics?
You know, thermodynamics pisses over your god beliefs. Don't need to look at anything as irrelevant to everyday life as quantum electrodynamics.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Mathilda's post
19-09-2016, 02:00 AM
RE: Do we really have the “jewel” of physics?
(18-09-2016 10:03 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  Oh noes! The theory has limitations! ... QED doesn't work at high energies...

Unlike the practice of QED, the theory of QED fails always, fails at any energy:

Quote:Wikipedia: the radius of convergence of the perturbation series in QED is zero... The coupling constant runs to infinity at finite energy

And let me repeat: hurting me you hurt only yourself. So stop the bulling and insults, stop talking the f-words.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2016, 02:02 AM
RE: Do we really have the “jewel” of physics?
(19-09-2016 01:37 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  You know, thermodynamics pisses over
I do not know, please tell me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2016, 02:28 AM
RE: Do we really have the “jewel” of physics?
Borg, you need someone to fucking toss your word salad. Drinking Beverage

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2016, 02:36 AM
RE: Do we really have the “jewel” of physics?
(19-09-2016 02:02 AM)theBorg Wrote:  
(19-09-2016 01:37 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  You know, thermodynamics pisses over
I do not know, please tell me.

You cut it out of my quote but I said that thermodynamics pisses over your god beliefs.

Your god, heaven and hell must violate the second law of thermodynamics if it is eternal. If not, then this means that it has 100% perfect exchange of energy when performing work, which we know is impossible.

Your god is supposed to be a complex, ordered and intelligent being. The only way that can happen is if it can settle into stable states. An intelligent being manages this by minimising free energy, i.e. energy that can do work. If it cannot do this then what you have instead is chaos. You cannot minimise have energy performing work without also increasing entropy otherwise you have the equivalent of a perpetual motion machine.

Now you may say that your god is not subject to the laws of thermodynamics, can perform work 100% efficiently, never decays and therefore has an infinite supply of free-energy. But in order for it to be relevant it also needs to sense and interact with the real world which is subject to the second law.

So say you pray to be cured of a sickness, say a stomach bug caused by bacteria. Your god needs to first hear your prayer. Information about the state of all your neurons needs to be transmitted using energy to your god. Where does that energy come from? What is reading it? This neural state is unique to you. Your god then needs to process this information, and then sense the state of every bacteria in your stomach. So information needs to be transmitted from your stomach back to your god. It then needs to process what needs to be changed and then perform work using energy to manipulate your stomach contents. How come no physicist has ever seen any hint of this energy transfer to and from your god sensing and manipulating ordinary matter?

The very concept of a god should be ludicrous to anyone who understands even the most basic concepts of Physics.

But let's say that your god isn't eternal and is subject to the second law of thermodynamics and decays over time. Then why call it a god? Instead it's an alien creature.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 10 users Like Mathilda's post
19-09-2016, 06:31 AM
RE: Do we really have the “jewel” of physics?
(19-09-2016 02:36 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  heaven... must violate the second law of thermodynamics if it is eternal....
Dear Mathilda, you are getting so many likes, however you do not use the formulas. I also often is writing the ideas in plain sentences. The Heavenly Jerusalem is timeless. Therefore, it is hardly possible to study physically now. But the Paradise near the first week after the creation of time is more likely to be correctly understood: there is the time running.

Please read http://arxiv.org Need I comment, or your thermodynamics has found Peace in True God?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2016, 06:55 AM
RE: Do we really have the “jewel” of physics?
(19-09-2016 06:31 AM)theBorg Wrote:  The Heavenly Jerusalem is timeless. Therefore, it is hardly possible to study physically now.

You completely ignore the whole point that your god needs to interact with the real world in order to be relevant and to answer prayers etc. Ignoring for the moment that you have absolutely no evidence for the existence of 'Heavenly Jerusalem', you have no explanation for how it could be timeless or any reason to think that it could be.


(19-09-2016 06:31 AM)theBorg Wrote:  Please read http://arxiv.org Need I comment, or your thermodynamics has found Peace in True God?

That has absolutely nothing to do with what I wrote. I shall in turn ask you to read the IEEE wiring regulations ... just because.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BS_7671
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Mathilda's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: