3 ms·

Quantization means that energy is observed to come in discrete packets, not that those packets are particles. That the EM field is omnipresent is not a mathemat

Quantization means that energy is observed to come in discrete packets, not that those packets are particles. That the EM field is omnipresent is not a mathematical artifact, but corresponds to a real-world phenomenon. Macro-scale analogies continue to not be valid for predicting quantum behavior.

v_lisivka 8y ago
And discrete packets, in turn, are generated by discrete things. At some zoom level, EM field will break and stop to be continuous. For example, Voyager found "magnetic bubbles" at the edge of Solar system, which may be caused by discrete nature of EM field. I'm asked is we can reproduce macro-scale experiment at quantum level. So your answer is "no, we cannot reproduce this weird particle-wave duality demonstrated by oil droplet at quantum scale", right?
- canhascodez 8y ago
  An oil droplet is a physical analogy for a quantum phenomenon. You cannot prove anything about the subatomic world by such analogies. Your insistence that it's "particles all the way down" also continues to be entirely incorrect. I think that you are more interested in believing that you have a special understanding of the universe than knowing the truth. Either way, I am uninterested in repeating myself further.
  - v_lisivka 8y ago
    Again, I'm not asking what is analogy to what. I'm asking is we can reproduce this insane wave-droplet duality of oil-droplet at quantum scale or not. You are refuse to say. You contribution to discussion is "you are wrong, your claims are false, I know the truth, but I will not tell you." Okay, you made claim that I made claim (instead of asking me) that I made claim that everything is made out of particles all the way down. It's not true. What we call particle/atom/object/planet/galactic/galianea is just system, which keeps energy inside and can transfer that energy to an other thing, when it in small radius to that system. For example, galaxy is a supper massive black hole or set of massive black holes. Rest of galaxy is mostly empty space, but this black hole can alter courses of stars and other black holes, by transferring energy to them via gravitational field. Same true for star system, planet, atom, particle. We can put emphasis on centre (black hole, star, planet, atom, nucleus, etc.), or at field, or at energy, or at radius of interaction, so we can say "everything is made of field/energy/particles", but truth is that every component of that is equally important. I found, that in most cases is easier to convince a scientist by going up instead of going down, because everybody agrees that we can zoom up indefinitely. Try to imagine that we zoomed up to 1E40 or so, so our visible universe is of size of elementary particle. How this worlds looks to you? As infinite uniform field of universes like our, like fog? Or we will still saw something like we already see in night sky?

v_lisivka 8y ago

And discrete packets, in turn, are generated by discrete things. At some zoom level, EM field will break and stop to be continuous. For example, Voyager found "magnetic bubbles" at the edge of Solar system, which may be caused by discrete nature of EM field. I'm asked is we can reproduce macro-scale experiment at quantum level. So your answer is "no, we cannot reproduce this weird particle-wave duality demonstrated by oil droplet at quantum scale", right?

canhascodez 8y ago
An oil droplet is a physical analogy for a quantum phenomenon. You cannot prove anything about the subatomic world by such analogies. Your insistence that it's "particles all the way down" also continues to be entirely incorrect. I think that you are more interested in believing that you have a special understanding of the universe than knowing the truth. Either way, I am uninterested in repeating myself further.
- v_lisivka 8y ago
  Again, I'm not asking what is analogy to what. I'm asking is we can reproduce this insane wave-droplet duality of oil-droplet at quantum scale or not. You are refuse to say. You contribution to discussion is "you are wrong, your claims are false, I know the truth, but I will not tell you." Okay, you made claim that I made claim (instead of asking me) that I made claim that everything is made out of particles all the way down. It's not true. What we call particle/atom/object/planet/galactic/galianea is just system, which keeps energy inside and can transfer that energy to an other thing, when it in small radius to that system. For example, galaxy is a supper massive black hole or set of massive black holes. Rest of galaxy is mostly empty space, but this black hole can alter courses of stars and other black holes, by transferring energy to them via gravitational field. Same true for star system, planet, atom, particle. We can put emphasis on centre (black hole, star, planet, atom, nucleus, etc.), or at field, or at energy, or at radius of interaction, so we can say "everything is made of field/energy/particles", but truth is that every component of that is equally important. I found, that in most cases is easier to convince a scientist by going up instead of going down, because everybody agrees that we can zoom up indefinitely. Try to imagine that we zoomed up to 1E40 or so, so our visible universe is of size of elementary particle. How this worlds looks to you? As infinite uniform field of universes like our, like fog? Or we will still saw something like we already see in night sky?