Ruth\'s \"real\" possibilities (General)

by David Turell @, Monday, July 29, 2013, 15:48 (3930 days ago) @ dhw


> dhw: This simply serves to show that a Heisenberg/TI potential remains outside space/time, since no "real" energy is involved. Only a space/time encounter results in a "real" event. My puzzlement remains: If a potential is regarded as real, there is no limit to what you can believe. But if "reality" is restricted to space/time encounters/transactions/events, why is an unrealized TI potential or "possibility" considered different from any other unrealized potential, and why is a physical potential considered more "real" than an idea or concept? N.B. I'm not saying there are no realities outside our own spacetime reality. That is the field both you and I are so eager to explore. But I need help in understanding the terms and arguments that are being used here!-
 "Undertanding the terms and arguments" are an issue in itself. That is why QM needs philosophers to play a major role. Ruth asked me if I knew about virtual particles, and I do. They follow Heisenberg's uncertainty & possibilty and I view them as changing smudges in fields. Please read the following to see what you and I are up against. The math, which we cannot do explains or reveals an understanding which seems almost unreal to me, but it is real, just on the other side!-http://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/particle-physics-basics/virtual-particles-what-are-they/


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum