You are here: SriPedia - Ramanuja - Archives - Apr 2003

Ramanuja List Archive: Message 00067 Apr 2003

 
Apr 2003 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


Sri:
Srimathe Ramanujaya nama:
Dear KK,
I am restricting my replies here(with the exception of few) 
and would prefer private communication if there is a need to stretch 
the topic.

> I beg to disagree. Please give relevant details when
> you say that physicists are appreciating our religion.
> I've read Bohr, Heisenberg, Hawkins, Penrose, Weinberg
> ( all physicists ) and Darwin, Dawkins and countless
> other evolutionary biologists ( Physics & Biology are
> my current favorite pure sciences. I started my
> fascination with chemistry though - I have to admit

My professor(retired now) is a particle physics guy. He used to tell 
lot of stories about these physicists. I only said quarks had not 
been detected in laboratory. Did I say "directly" or "indirectly"?
It has not been detected directly.............I may skip many things 
when I write for brevity to save time. It is the reader who has to 
cross check. This is the "standard problem" that comes up when a 
reader "reads" a book by an author. This can highly lead to 
misunderstanding. In the recent years,physicists have got some 
exposures to other religions. In the olden days,there were very few 
who really used to read and one among the few was Oppenheimer. He 
used to read BG and even on the day he died,he had Bhagavad Gita in 
his hand. His classes always used to be packed and would quote BG
(apart from physics) to the students. I have lot of foreigners who 
ask me about our religion. 

Einstein did believe in God apart from his fascination for symmetry.

Whether Science finds the solution or not,God only knows(I'm not 
going to live long to see who wins the race!). Science goes by 
evidence! The very EPR argument suggests,for the example that 
Einstein suggested,the twin particles which are separated far off can 
not affect each other's measurement instantaneously,because nothing 
can travel faster than light. Alain Aspect's findings might confirm 
once again QM yet it has not confirmed staunchly that there are 
independent particles that can move faster than the light. QM deals 
with statistical averages. Some individual particles may travel 
faster than light but the statistical average is always less than or 
equal to c,the speed of light.

Yes. Bohr brainwashed many. So many articles even after his death
(till 1960's when Bell came up with his inequality) would be turned 
down if it was any way related to Copenhagen Interpretation. Don't 
forget Eddington was a block for Chandrashekhar. Chandrashekhar used 
to shift his field itself every decade. Einstein's theory is not 
tested in a "very strong" gravitational field. To test 
theories,sphisticated instruments are needed. Newtonian theory 
couldn't answer the "perihelion of mercury" and for 
particles/observer at the the speed of light Newtonian thoery fails 
to answer. To confirm this,it took almost two centuries. Yet on a day 
to day scale it/Newtonian Mechanics is still valid. 

For example,time clock of a person standing on 100th floor will be 
different from that of a person who is standing in the basement and 
this time difference due to gravity can be measured by sensitive 
nuclear clocks to confirm Einstein's thoery about the effect of 
gravity on matter but this time difference is so small that it can be 
neglected in classical sense. Similarly QM(probabilistic theory)only 
has to be the limiting case of EInstein's theory not the other way 
round. Again this depends on what one wants to see/believe in 
reality. BTW I have read Weinberg's on First three minutes and is an 
interesting book. 



> 6. Neils Bohr, Copenhagen interpretation.
> Your comments are quite wrong. Bohr pointed out that
> it is meaningless to ask questions like - "What is the
> position and momentum of an electron before I make a
> measurement". He proposed that "position" and
> "momentum" form complimentary pieces of a puzzle and
> knowledge of one excludes the knowledge of other.
> Nothing more. Nothing less.
> It is a stretch of imagination to extend copenhagan
> interpretation to mean that Bohr denies reality
> altogether. 

This is the precise incompleteness in thought or whatever you call it 
that Einstein disliked it to the core and he also said it will 
crumble like Newtonian Mechanics after some years. Any theory which 
has statistics/probability as a building block can not sustain for 
long. That was Einstein's view. It all depends on one's experience(in 
reality!)what to believe/expect and what not to believe about reality.


> 8. Well, I wouldn't call Bohr brainwashed physicists.
> He merely pointed out, it is futile to engage in wild
> speculations and philosophies if you cannot prove by
> experiment. I think he follwed occam's razor
> principle.
> Also note that "reality denial" is only one
> interpretation of QM. You have not one not two but
> infinite realities in "Many worlds interpretation"
> proposed by Everett. :)

I only mentioned Copenhagen(Bohr) according to which the reality is 
denied. Now you have so many versions of even superstring theory but 
nothing is yet concrete to favor one or the other. Even when the "so 
called" quantum gang of 1920's and 1930's were all involved in 
nuclear physics,it was "only" Einstein who started thinking about 
Unifying gravity with other forces. It is this gravity which poses 
lot of difficulty as it's strength is way off from the strengths of 
the other three. The other three have been unified sucessfully but 
still the quest for the "superforce" is ongoing. 

Last but not the least science is full of surprises. One fellow will 
propound the theory and another may prove/disprove that theory. It is 
a matter of time. No matter how far they succeed still scientists can 
not explain certain things. Whether or not, Bohr believed that it is 
futile to engage in wild philosphical speculations,the Quantum theory 
leads to philosophical implications only.

Best Regards
AzhvAr EmperumAnAr JIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam
NC Nappinnai 







[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list