Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Category

Physics

At Mind Matters News: Theoretical physicist: Quantum theory must be replaced

Sabine Hossenfelder can live with the neutrinos that are inconsistent with the Standard Model of physics but quantum uncertainties are beyond the pale. We might conclude that the universe is a stranger place than we have sometimes been led to suspect and that the amount and type of strangeness each of us can tolerate depends, to some extent, on prior commitments. But it is what it is anyway. Read More ›

At Mind Matters News: A physicist defends imperfection in our universe: It’s essential

Great physicist Paul Dirac discovered antimatter by assuming symmetry (a quality of perfection). But in the details, the wheels came off. Read More ›

At Mind Matters News: Some elements of our universe do not make scientific sense

The usually commonsensical Sabine Hossenfelder admits that this one stumps physicists: Well-attested observations of neutrinos are not compatible with the Standard Model of our universe that most physicists accept. Much about neutrinos is weird and it does not appear to be an artifact of bungled experiments. Read More ›

String theory again: Will a correction to Einstein save it?

At times, the advocacy for string theory begins to sound a bit like a religion. But, in an important sense, it IS a religion. They’re trying to make sense of the universe and eventually, that shades into metaphysics. Read More ›

The reality of “imaginary” numbers — discovery, not invention

Over at YouTube, there is a bit of history of Math, on study of cubic functions — and yes there is as usual, some less than exemplary detail — that led to the “invention” of imaginary numbers: Now of course, I contend that this was discovery not invention (I often don’t buy Veritas Sum’s narrative, but here is a way to see the story). In News’ thread on i, I commented at 33: your definition [– Eugene at 8: “there exists such a pair of real numbers (0, 1) that (0, 1) * (0, 1) = -1, where “*” is the specific multiplication rule defined for these types of pairs” –] is tantamount to describing the role of sqrt – Read More ›

Is Sarah Salviander going to make a difference in science?

Of herself she says: Astrophysicist. I have a PhD in Astrophysics and worked for many years in academia as a scientific researcher. Though I am currently focused on ministry work, I am still active in astrophysical research. Visit my research page here. Read More ›

Major cosmological principle — the universe is the same in all directions — is under fire

At Quanta: “The consensus now is that it is a small effect that does not, in the end, cause too much trouble,” Nadathur said. But that 2% could yet prove consequential. Durrer is investigating whether backreaction might help resolve a growing cosmological crisis. Read More ›

At Mind Matters News: How can the universe have arisen from nothing?

Louise runs through a number of ideas that sound popular in the lunchroom but don’t stand the test of careful thought. Just for example, “one day science will answer the question of why the universe exists.” But that’s not what science does. Generally speaking, science answers “how” questions, not “why” questions. Read More ›

Can gravitational waves help account for why there is more matter than antimatter?

“not an electric charge, but some sort of charge”? Okay… At least we are still in the world of hard science here. One thing: They had better trademark the name Q-ball. If their idea takes off, they will be glad they did. Go Q-balls! Read More ›

FYI: In quantum mechanics, time may flow differently

At Eurekalert: As pointed out by Giulia Rubino, lead-author of the publication, “although time is often treated as a continuously increasing parameter, our study shows that the laws governing its flow in quantum mechanical contexts are much more complex. This may suggest that we need to rethink the way we represent this quantity in all those contexts where quantum laws play a crucial role.” Read More ›

Sabine Hossenfelder explains why antimatter doesn’t fall up

Hossenfelder: Inside a neutron and proton there aren’t just three quarks. There’s really a soup of particles that holds the quarks together, and some of the particles in the soup are anti-particles. Why don’t those anti-particles annihilate? They do. They are created and annihilate all the time. We therefore call them “virtual particles.” But they still make a substantial contribution to the gravitational mass of neutrons and protons. Read More ›

At Mind Matters News: Can quantum physics, neuroscience merge as quantum consciousness?

The problem is, if we assume that “the mind is nothing more than the brain,” there may be nothing we can discover about how it works. Gleiser wishes we could prove that that’s wrong but he can’t. Read More ›