- #1
Ran out of sp
- 6
- 0
Quantum mechanics is a very powerful and accurate method of describing the actions of small particles in space but it has its limits.
On the large scale, QM cannot explain relativistic effects.
On the smallest of scales, the theory starts to become nonsensical. QM is based on events whch are partly explicable as waves and partly as independent particles. The trend over the years has been towards an exclusive interpretation using point particles.
The mathematics of Newtonian mechanics uses the idea of a centre of mass at a particular point in space but this does not prove that the Sun, Moon and Earth are dimensionless points. Yet the concept of centres of mass and charge is applied unquestionly at the quantum scale.
How can a dimensionless entity have a spin or a magnetic moment?
If a particle is confined to a single point, its mass density and charge density must be infinite.
And if everything is restricted to dimensionless points, space must be 100% empty.
There is an even greater problem in seeing protons and neutrons as point particles when they are made up from smaller point particles called quarks.
While the mathematical accuracy of QM has been well established, its interpretation in terms of point particles is ultimately untenable and tends toward the dogmatic.
I'd like to hear what other people think about this.
...ace
On the large scale, QM cannot explain relativistic effects.
On the smallest of scales, the theory starts to become nonsensical. QM is based on events whch are partly explicable as waves and partly as independent particles. The trend over the years has been towards an exclusive interpretation using point particles.
The mathematics of Newtonian mechanics uses the idea of a centre of mass at a particular point in space but this does not prove that the Sun, Moon and Earth are dimensionless points. Yet the concept of centres of mass and charge is applied unquestionly at the quantum scale.
How can a dimensionless entity have a spin or a magnetic moment?
If a particle is confined to a single point, its mass density and charge density must be infinite.
And if everything is restricted to dimensionless points, space must be 100% empty.
There is an even greater problem in seeing protons and neutrons as point particles when they are made up from smaller point particles called quarks.
While the mathematical accuracy of QM has been well established, its interpretation in terms of point particles is ultimately untenable and tends toward the dogmatic.
I'd like to hear what other people think about this.
...ace