Particle and wave
In the SD
Hello Rabbi Dr.,
I wanted to ask a question about how a force at a distance acts on two bodies, for example gravity or electric force.
So there’s some kind of parable I’ve seen that people like to say that a heavy body or one with potential seems to curve the space around it, and then the other bodies move in its direction, but I didn’t really understand what this solves, since the assumption is that for a body to move toward the heavy body in space, it also requires a force (otherwise it would remain “floating” in space).
I also saw that there are all sorts of claims that there are tiny particles that carry forces from one body to another, but then the question arises as to what caused them and then you supposedly created another particle to carry them. And so if we continue the regression to infinity, we will get something that is a sequence of particles in space, in which our body is essentially a kind of wave.
Although I don’t think these implications explain too much of findings in physics like quantum, etc. But still, what does the Rabbi think?
These are questions that require studying physics. They are difficult to explain briefly.
The assumption is that there are particles that carry the force from one body to another. The gravitational force is carried by gravitons and the electromagnetic force by photons. I don’t see why there is an infinite regress here. What does “what caused them” mean?
As for the curvature of space, this is the theory of general relativity. According to this theory, a force acting between particles can be converted into a curvature of space-time around one of them. For a better understanding, you need to study relativity.
Regarding gravity, it is more correct to think that a body in free fall does not have a force acting on it. In order for it not to fall, a force must be applied. The body freely slides down towards the heavy body. Without force.
Regarding infinite regression, it seems that you are referring to Zeno's paradoxes, how is motion possible at all.
But there is no regression, there are laws of nature that are given. And ”what caused them?” laws of nature.
I once heard a question on the subject posed in a question, and I would be very happy to have an answer.
The only force that can be understood without action from a distance is a push. But even this push is difficult to understand. Before the pushing thing enters the realm of the pushed one, the pushed one will not move from its place. And before the pushed one can enter the pusher there, how do the two know that it is time to move together? The transfer of momentum itself needs to be studied if it is not a simple push. (I don't know if it is relevant, but I read the article on the paradox of the arrow in flight and I don't know how to extract a solution to this question from it. So if using a solution from there is relevant, a brief explanation would be helpful without the hassle of repeating the whole thing).
This issue was already raised by Greek philosophers on causality. It is accepted that the cause precedes the cause, but this is not the case. The cause and the cause are always in nothingness as one. And there is evidence for this, because if there is a gap in time, then there is a moment when the cause exists and the cause has not yet occurred. In short, the cause and the cause are always in nothingness as one, and there is no time gap between them. The interesting question is how, then, a period of time is created that the entire process (the causal chain consists of several links) takes. This is already related to the concept of continuity.
Oh, I missed that, thanks. I need to think about that.
[A note to myself that should be in small print because it's just an unprocessed thought: Everything is very vague to me right now, but it seems to me that the question of pushing in time (causality) is a little easier than the question of pushing in space. Because time passes by itself.
In causality, one can come after another like the grease at midnight in Egypt. Time is continuous, there is a ‘moment’ when the cause exists and the cause has not yet occurred, but there is no such duration. And so it is also understandable how the duration of time that the entire process takes is created. And all that remains is the usual question of what is causality in general beyond temporal tracking. But with pushing in space, it seems that nothing needs to move, and a positional transition, unlike a temporal transition, does not occur by itself.]
In space there is no problem because indeed the entry of one sphere into the space of the other is done simultaneously with the departure of the other. Here in particular I do not see a problem. I do not see any connection to the fact that time flows by itself (by the way, this is not at all clear, but we will not get into this pitfall here. I have elaborated on it in the fourth book of Talmudic Logic).
The entry is simultaneous with the departure because it is not the reason for the departure, but rather a “force”, and therefore it is impossible to put forces on urgency, as the question seems to show.
I have been plotting the fifth book since a previous answer, is there any interest in reading the books in order? I only read the first two books of the series when they came out (the truth is a shame. The taste of the first is still in my mouth to this day).
As I said, I don't see a problem with that.
The order is irrelevant.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
