3 ms·

when you understand quantum theory correctly, you will realize that particles don't exist by themselves. They are a temporary localization. this means that the

when you understand quantum theory correctly, you will realize that particles don't exist by themselves. They are a temporary localization. this means that the number of quarks inside a proton is not actually fixed. when a particle becomes disentangled with the system, that localized it, there's no longer a particle I mentioned this recently, in the context of the laziness in language, leading to the miseducation of those who don't know better, and was heavily downvoted and ridiculed keep it up, hn, you'll see idiocracy soon enough and then no one will trigger you

rolph 3y ago
thanks, i want to stress the model of the proton i had posited up thread is very simplified, for the purpose of explanation.
CoastalCoder 3y ago
HN is a great training ground for learning how to present arguments in a compelling, engaging manner.
- blueprint 3y ago
  that may be true, but I'm already highly trained at that. But hey, what if you just ratchet up the difficulty to infinity. Then it will train people even better. Either that or it'll destroy the community because you dont have any criterion of right and wrong in your claim. It doesnt matter how correct people are. The more correct people are the worse they're treated. The better we get at presenting true arguments the more you will resent us and the more you have no choice but to react with violence (being unable to admit your lie), as HNers do now with trap counterarguments and gaslighting. No wonder suicide is on the rise.
  - Dylan16807 3y ago
    What's the lie that needs to be admitted?
    - blueprint 3y ago
      the lie i meant is if people claim to want to know what they dont yet. it usually happens without their realization. look in the history of the greater philosophers you see it in the mechanism of narcissistic abuse as well you might also read up on the girardian scapegoat. the point is people like the comfort of falsehood so it tends to propagate more easily. few who were around masters wanted the actual teaching rather than some life quality improvements and basic answers. One of the merits certain people can get by hanging out around a real teacher is that those people can pretend that they were one of the people who wanted to know in front of those who don't know any better.
  - AndrewKemendo 3y ago
    I feel what you’re saying, but it’s incumbent on people who understand stuff to explain it to people who don’t in a way that they can comprehend The reality is that we’re all ignorant about most things, so having an attitude with someone around something you know - irrespective of how you know it - is a losing strategy and as you said leads to poor interactions Try to give people more grace and you’ll find people are more capable than you might know
    - blueprint 3y ago
      I'll try to keep it in mind. thanks for your kindness.
rvba 3y ago
What do you mean by "temporary localization"? That protons move? That they can poof? They dont seem to self destruct. On a side note: are there any models that assume that there are fields/shapes that are constanly bombarbed by neutrinos and other stuff. Thks bombardment seems to be always ignored
- Avicebron 3y ago
  by drawing a hypothetical box around your system with and measuring it, you've bounded it locally.
- blueprint 3y ago
  no, we're talking about quarks or any isolated quantum systen
- blueprint 3y ago
  without being localized, they remain a probability wave because the "universe" of information literally doesn't know enough about them anymore
anon84873628 3y ago
I was ready to up vote until the third paragraph. Reading your other comments down thread doesn't paint you in a good light. Maybe your argument about laziness in language wasn't as cogent as you thought. Maybe you aren't as good at presenting arguments as you thought. In other words, maybe you need some humility.
- blueprint 3y ago
  yeah maybe but if you knew for sure you'd be able to be sure of that and also show the proof instead what you did is present the impression that you had which is a synthesis of what you encountered and what was in you from the past. If you study much philosophy, you'll have to admit the fact that a large number of people turn away from what is true. It's not pleasant to you, I know. nor is it pleasant for you to see the product of the system that you want to close your eyes to talking to you in an unpleasant manner.
gjm11 3y ago
So far as I can tell, the fact that "particles" are just what we call particular kinds of excitations in quantum fields doesn't in any way answer, or obviate, or otherwise demystify the question of why the electric charge associated with one sort of "particle" should be exactly 3x the electric charge associated with another. So your comment is not only gratuitously rude, it's also either (1) wrong or (2) missing some essential explanation.

rolph 3y ago

thanks, i want to stress the model of the proton i had posited up thread is very simplified, for the purpose of explanation.

CoastalCoder 3y ago

HN is a great training ground for learning how to present arguments in a compelling, engaging manner.

blueprint 3y ago
that may be true, but I'm already highly trained at that. But hey, what if you just ratchet up the difficulty to infinity. Then it will train people even better. Either that or it'll destroy the community because you dont have any criterion of right and wrong in your claim. It doesnt matter how correct people are. The more correct people are the worse they're treated. The better we get at presenting true arguments the more you will resent us and the more you have no choice but to react with violence (being unable to admit your lie), as HNers do now with trap counterarguments and gaslighting. No wonder suicide is on the rise.
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  What's the lie that needs to be admitted?
  - blueprint 3y ago
    the lie i meant is if people claim to want to know what they dont yet. it usually happens without their realization. look in the history of the greater philosophers you see it in the mechanism of narcissistic abuse as well you might also read up on the girardian scapegoat. the point is people like the comfort of falsehood so it tends to propagate more easily. few who were around masters wanted the actual teaching rather than some life quality improvements and basic answers. One of the merits certain people can get by hanging out around a real teacher is that those people can pretend that they were one of the people who wanted to know in front of those who don't know any better.
- AndrewKemendo 3y ago
  I feel what you’re saying, but it’s incumbent on people who understand stuff to explain it to people who don’t in a way that they can comprehend The reality is that we’re all ignorant about most things, so having an attitude with someone around something you know - irrespective of how you know it - is a losing strategy and as you said leads to poor interactions Try to give people more grace and you’ll find people are more capable than you might know
  - blueprint 3y ago
    I'll try to keep it in mind. thanks for your kindness.

rvba 3y ago

What do you mean by "temporary localization"? That protons move? That they can poof? They dont seem to self destruct. On a side note: are there any models that assume that there are fields/shapes that are constanly bombarbed by neutrinos and other stuff. Thks bombardment seems to be always ignored

Avicebron 3y ago
by drawing a hypothetical box around your system with and measuring it, you've bounded it locally.
blueprint 3y ago
no, we're talking about quarks or any isolated quantum systen
blueprint 3y ago
without being localized, they remain a probability wave because the "universe" of information literally doesn't know enough about them anymore

anon84873628 3y ago

I was ready to up vote until the third paragraph. Reading your other comments down thread doesn't paint you in a good light. Maybe your argument about laziness in language wasn't as cogent as you thought. Maybe you aren't as good at presenting arguments as you thought. In other words, maybe you need some humility.

blueprint 3y ago
yeah maybe but if you knew for sure you'd be able to be sure of that and also show the proof instead what you did is present the impression that you had which is a synthesis of what you encountered and what was in you from the past. If you study much philosophy, you'll have to admit the fact that a large number of people turn away from what is true. It's not pleasant to you, I know. nor is it pleasant for you to see the product of the system that you want to close your eyes to talking to you in an unpleasant manner.

gjm11 3y ago

So far as I can tell, the fact that "particles" are just what we call particular kinds of excitations in quantum fields doesn't in any way answer, or obviate, or otherwise demystify the question of why the electric charge associated with one sort of "particle" should be exactly 3x the electric charge associated with another. So your comment is not only gratuitously rude, it's also either (1) wrong or (2) missing some essential explanation.