🧵 Aren't these just the same thing?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 20:51:17 UTC No. 16490828
In theory there should be an infinite number of them, so long as they can happen, that is to be conditioned.
in the same way that some atoms are "real" but can't exist because they're so unstable.
doesn't this mean that Witten is onto something with his string theory? particles are just different modes of the same thing?
so no more turtles all the way down?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 21:23:34 UTC No. 16490862
>>16490828
>infinite
stopped reading here
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 21:25:05 UTC No. 16490866
>>16490862
How does it feel to be a homosexual?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Nov 2024 22:23:21 UTC No. 16490928
>>16490828
it's tempting to say of course because when you smash particles together hard enough you get the full range of other particles coming out
but it could very well be wrong to even go down the string path when after 50 years it's still not able to mathematically describe our universe
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 04:36:21 UTC No. 16491287
>>16490866
how does it feel to be wrong?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Nov 2024 04:38:01 UTC No. 16491288
>>16490828
>In theory there should be an infinite number of them
No, it can be shown that there can't be more than three generations of quarks or leptons.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 18:24:47 UTC No. 16493092
>>16491288
What is the argument that there can't be more than three?
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 18:59:39 UTC No. 16493118
>>16490828
They are the same thing: irreducible unitary representations. They aren’t equivalent representations and the fact that the Lorentz group is not compact means that they are infinite-dimensional. I doubt you know enough to understand any of this, however.
>>16493092
There is no theoretical argument, ignore the retard. There are theoretical bounds on more than three generations which disagree with observations.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 19:13:58 UTC No. 16493127
>>16490828
Are strings just monads?
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 21:42:58 UTC No. 16493328
>>16490828
Are there any resources that go into detail about how they measure and differentiate these particles from one another thats dumbed down a little for a brainlet like myself? I'm aware that there are different energy measurements for each one that they can pick up and measure when they smash particles into each other, but how? How the fuck do they even say "oh, look, we found a new sub-sub atomic particle because this printout from this super specialized sensor has some slightly different numbers on it."
All of the CERN documentaries I've watched don't go into any detail, they just say "here's where we did this, look at the fancy machine." And a lot of the published papers on the topic are word salad. I'd love to know more about how we study these things.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 22:32:32 UTC No. 16493399
>>16493328
grug take hit rock A and rock B
they make boom
but if grug hit rock A with rock C, the sound is different (because of the underlying structure of the rocks)
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Nov 2024 23:36:38 UTC No. 16493467
>>16493399
but if there many parts inside rock then how grug know what parts inside rock make sound?
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 02:49:44 UTC No. 16493627
>>16491288
>it can be shown that there can't be more than three generations of quarks or leptons.
I call bullshit. Why would the cap be three?
Anonymous at Wed, 27 Nov 2024 20:55:26 UTC No. 16495442
>>16490828
There are no such things as fundamental particles. It’s just a form of pure elitist philosophical materialism that the so called superior scientists use so they can claim only they are only ones smart enough have access to the fundamental nature of reality.
>trust us bro you’re just monkey men, trust us bro you’re so unbelievably insignificant you’re just in one of an infinite number of universes, just us bro everything just exploded out of le heckin nothing for no reason and everything is completely meaningless and pointless.
Yawn. I think the flat Earther’s are more likely to be right.
Anonymous at Wed, 27 Nov 2024 21:28:18 UTC No. 16495498
>>16493118
>They are the same thing: irreducible unitary representations. They aren’t equivalent representations and the fact that the Lorentz group is not compact means that they are infinite-dimensional. I doubt you know enough to understand any of this, however.
I don't, I'm just working from intuition.
Anonymous at Wed, 27 Nov 2024 21:32:36 UTC No. 16495501
>>16495442
> they are only ones smart enough have access to the fundamental nature of reality.
You realize scientific results are publicly available to everyone right? The only thing stopping anyone from having the same access to the "nature of reality" as the "so called superior scientists" is the time investment it takes to understand what they are doing.
Anonymous at Wed, 27 Nov 2024 21:35:14 UTC No. 16495505
>>16495501
not anon.
many of them do seem to have a stick up their ass about it however.