3 ms·
"Such a bump is the unmistakable signature of “resonance,” one of the most ubiquitous phenomena in nature." If so then, physicists call "resonance" a "particle
by nyc111 5y ago
"Such a bump is the unmistakable signature of “resonance,” one of the most ubiquitous phenomena in nature."
If so then, physicists call "resonance" a "particle". Or what physicists call particles are resonances. But why? If you observe resonance call it resonance. I don't get it.
- wanda 5y agovar particle = new Resonance(); as for why, probably so that literature written now still makes sense following on from older material from the 20th century that isn't wrong but does include some antiquated terminology. Pedagogically useful to use the word particle.
- p_noumenon 5y agoIt's still called a particle because that's a useful abstraction, and also keep in mind that correctly identifying it as resonance happened much later than people first started to use said abstraction. In reality, we know by now that there's no such thing as a particle: https://arxiv.org/abs/0807.3930 https://arxiv.org/abs/0807.3930
- dr_dshiv 5y agoAt first, resonance was used as a programmatic analogy to guide understanding of spectral lines. Then, it turned out that resonance wasn't a metaphor, it was a mechanism.
- blueprint 5y agoParticles don't really exist - they're merely what it looks like when we make a measurement of a field.