Wednesday, August 14, 2013

The Quirky Top Quark and the Problem of Pull

Now, don't freak out, I know this isn't a real Tyson quote, but it's meant to illustrate a point. Science these days has been called "counter-intuitive", "strange", and even "unimaginable" by even top Scientists themselves, but this statement made by he The University Record at U of Michigan really takes the cake:

“ Quarks are one of the basic building blocks of everything in the universe – including protons,
neutrons and other subatomic particles that make up the nuclei of atoms…The top quark has the mass of an entire gold atom…credit for the discovery will go to 440 physicists who are members of the Collider Detector Facility (CDF) experiment at Fermilab.”
Before we can understand just how absurd this is, let's take a quick trip down the rabbit hole of physics to put this statement into perspective.

If you open this in a new page you can zoom in all the way if you need to.

Now, I made that diagram for two reasons. One was to really give you an idea of the scale of quarks so that the absurdity of the above quote becomes clear. The second was that I can't pass up a chance to illustrate the shortcomings and contradictions that are inherent in Quantum's discrete particle model of the atom. Architecture is everything in physics, and Quantum fails to provide any objective architecture of it's objects. Bill Gaede says it best:
..[T]he reason that a chain produces pull is that discrete links are tied to each other into a
‘continuous’ chain. The chain is not made of a single piece. We say that the chain is continuous because pull travels uninterruptedly from one end of it to the other. It is not the chain that is continuous, but force which is incessant or constant as a result of the peculiar architecture of this intermediary. []
 The quantum model of the atom does not allow for physical contact between discrete particles, and even if the discrete particles of the Quantum world (think of a marble) were to collide, no pull could be possible. Therefore, structures like DNA could not possibly form. How could the atoms ever pull each other and link up? Unfortunately these questions will not phase a dyed in the wool mathematical physicist. They have already accepted that nature is too weird to understand, and they prefer mathematical descriptions over genuine physical models and explanations. That's how they can believe that a cell is heavier than an entire body. With math, anything is possible. In reality, on the other hand, there are limits to possibilities.


Post a Comment