Timeline for Are particles merely "relatively stable" patterns that can appear on their respective fields?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 4 at 17:44 | comment | added | Tobias Fünke | You say There is nothing observable about "the electron field" except electrons and positrons -- but even the ontology of electrons and positrons is not totally clear and depends on which level of (scientific) realism you believe. | |
| Sep 19, 2022 at 20:05 | vote | accept | Uro | ||
| Sep 19, 2022 at 14:47 | comment | added | Uro | Also, can't edit my first comment, by "whatever else there might be" I didn't mean actual things but perturbations, but it doesn't matter since the whole idea was based on a misunderstanding. | |
| Sep 19, 2022 at 14:38 | comment | added | Uro | However I understand now from reading anna v's answer and yours that I had a completely wrong idea of particles and fields. I didn't know that there were fields for particles, and thought particles were an emergent result of the way other fields interacted with each other, with no specific field "dedicated" to those particles. Also in the previous comment, I am probably not using "perturbation" with the right meaning for that word, but I cannot find a better word. | |
| Sep 19, 2022 at 14:38 | comment | added | Uro | When I say look I mean that from a purely mathematical and abstract perspective, not that we could observe it physically with some experiment. When I say relatively stable I add "relatively" to include particles that have a very short lifespan while still excluding whatever else there might be during the (probably, idk) even shorter time an interaction happens between two particles colliding at very high speed, if at any point there happened to be perturbations in the field that cannot be regarded as particles right before it turns into particles. (cont.) | |
| Sep 19, 2022 at 12:02 | history | answered | ACuriousMind♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |