4 ms·

What would be the consequences if this is accurate? What assumptions are based on the size of a proton? What kind of technology was previously thought impossi

by dmoney 16y ago

What would be the consequences if this is accurate? What assumptions are based on the size of a proton? What kind of technology was previously thought impossible because protons were just too darn big? Because (as a non-physicist) I can't think of anything.

btilly 16y ago
The heart of physics right now are two theories that disagree with each other. One is Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, which is about gravity. The other is called the Standard Model, which is about quantum mechanics. (The whole Higgs boson issue? That's about measuring the last unknown parameter in the Standard Model, which is the mass of the Higgs boson.) The hope of physicists is to be able to find a theory that combines the two. Because they fundamentally disagree, we know that one or both, probably both, are both somewhat wrong, but we don't have any idea how and where the theories begin to fall apart. Therefore if we can find experiments which show problems, then we can get insight on what the problems are with the theory, and hopefully that will lead us to a better theory. To draw a parallel, in the late 1800s it looked like physics was nearly done. The big problems were solved. The remaining discrepancies were small. And of what practical use was it to know more about the movement of light, why black body radiation didn't look like what theory said it should, and whether there was really such a thing as atoms? Yet the answers to those few small puzzles lead to world changing discoveries from nuclear power to transistors. Nobody can tell you what is left to discover. Nobody can guess the power of unknown scientific theories. But through history, science has proved its worth repeatedly in outside proportions. Isn't the hope that this could happen again worth at least some resources?
- ThomPete 16y ago
  Yeah we don't even know if it makes sense to combine the two. Human need for completeness is driving that, but we might find ourselves with two models that don't need to be combined.
  - btilly 16y ago
    We are trying to model one reality. Surely there must be a model that models that reality better than either of our current models?

by dmoney 16y ago

btilly 16y ago

The heart of physics right now are two theories that disagree with each other. One is Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, which is about gravity. The other is called the Standard Model, which is about quantum mechanics. (The whole Higgs boson issue? That's about measuring the last unknown parameter in the Standard Model, which is the mass of the Higgs boson.) The hope of physicists is to be able to find a theory that combines the two. Because they fundamentally disagree, we know that one or both, probably both, are both somewhat wrong, but we don't have any idea how and where the theories begin to fall apart. Therefore if we can find experiments which show problems, then we can get insight on what the problems are with the theory, and hopefully that will lead us to a better theory. To draw a parallel, in the late 1800s it looked like physics was nearly done. The big problems were solved. The remaining discrepancies were small. And of what practical use was it to know more about the movement of light, why black body radiation didn't look like what theory said it should, and whether there was really such a thing as atoms? Yet the answers to those few small puzzles lead to world changing discoveries from nuclear power to transistors. Nobody can tell you what is left to discover. Nobody can guess the power of unknown scientific theories. But through history, science has proved its worth repeatedly in outside proportions. Isn't the hope that this could happen again worth at least some resources?

ThomPete 16y ago
Yeah we don't even know if it makes sense to combine the two. Human need for completeness is driving that, but we might find ourselves with two models that don't need to be combined.
- btilly 16y ago
  We are trying to model one reality. Surely there must be a model that models that reality better than either of our current models?