3 ms·
Just because "Particles are epiphenomena arising from fields." You are completely missing the point that the bumps in the field are what we call particles. Ther
by platz 10y ago
Just because "Particles are epiphenomena arising from fields." You are completely missing the point that the bumps in the field are what we call particles. There can be distances between the bumps/particles and that means that the bumps are "separated", because it matters whether the bumps are next to each other or far away... This is what we mean by separation. No one is saying the field itself doesn't fill all of space (which it does)
Furthermore you can still speak of particles just as you can speak of atoms, because it's useful to call the bumps something other than bumps all the time.
- intrasight 10y agoBut there are only "bumps" when observed, right?
- platz 10y agono-one knows what is really "there" when unobserved. fields don't get us out of having to interpret the wave equation (the wave equation is a whole different kind of "waviness", it's not the same thing as the field); and the wave equation only lets us calculate probabilities. so we don't know. but it's true that some things don't behave like particles when we're not looking.