The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Want to piss off a physicist? Ask them what the Pauli exclusion principle is
Poast new message in this thread
Date: December 9th, 2023 8:37 PM Author: Exhilarant hissy fit alpha Let them give you the canned definition, then ask "ok but why isn't it universal? Why are there all these particles that can ignore it freely?" That's when they get pissed. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47152546) |
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:17 AM Author: Exhilarant hissy fit alpha (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153162) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:30 AM Author: Chocolate sweet tailpipe which ones ignore it? bosons? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153185) |
 |
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:42 AM Author: Exhilarant hissy fit alpha Photons, most notoriously. I think other "bosons" do too if they even exist. No one has ever seen most of them. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153210) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:46 AM Author: Exhilarant hissy fit alpha This question always annoys me because they named the particles after Bose, but Bose was only looking at photons. Photons should be called "bosons," and these other particles should be named after the frauds who "predicted" them but still can't prove they exist. Bose himself never would have cared about the "Higgs field." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153217) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:50 AM Author: concupiscible really tough guy Why anything? Answering why fermions and bosons exist would be in the purview of a TOE/GUT. And even then you could still ask "why?" like why does anything exist at all? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153224) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:52 AM Author: Exhilarant hissy fit alpha Exhibit a (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153227) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:54 AM Author: concupiscible really tough guy Why do we recognize that they exist? Literally math and a century of observation you mouthbreather. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153232) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:56 AM Author: Exhilarant hissy fit alpha "Recognize" is the strongest verb you can use here. The most you can say is that experimental data is consistent with what we would expect if they existed. That doesn't mean something else couldn't be causing the results, it just means you can't think of a more plausible explanation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153237) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:58 AM Author: concupiscible really tough guy That's literally all of physics you retard We don't "know" anything empirical about anything beyond what empirical knowledge currently describes. You like to pick at pet topics but you really have a gripe with the philosophy of physics, which is a topic you are entirely too autistic to comprehend. |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 1:00 AM Author: Exhilarant hissy fit alpha A photoelectric sensor can report that it detected particles directly. No one has ever built a muon detector that can tell you where the muon touched it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153245) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 1:06 AM Author: concupiscible really tough guy It's the same principle, photons don't get collected like balls in a chute, there must be some sort of interaction. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153253) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 1:10 AM Author: Exhilarant hissy fit alpha We have a lot more confirmatory evidence that a photon passed through the detector than we have that a theoretical particle caused some inconsequential effect when we detected when turned on the magnets at LHC. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153258) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 1:13 AM Author: concupiscible really tough guy More evidence for photon: 0 pinocchios Inconsequential: 5 pinocchios https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon_tomography |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 1:18 AM Author: Exhilarant hissy fit alpha We have eyes that can detect photons and we can compare what our eyes see with what the thingy reports. Can't do that with muons. We're seeing an effect we would expect to see if muons exist, but we've also imagined a particle that can do all the things we're seeing. It's circular logic, because you're constantly allowing the definition of "muon" to evolve with whatever the fuck it is you're measuring. You're not telling me something is red when my eyes also tell me it's red. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153278) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 1:19 AM Author: concupiscible really tough guy This is an empirical problem, not a problem with muons. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153286) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 1:26 AM Author: Exhilarant hissy fit alpha It's an ontological problem. Moreover, even if we could confirm the existence of these subatomic particles it would move us no closer to understanding a goddamn thing about physics. Just because a particle can cross the Higgs field doesn't mean it broke the supersymmetry and brought matter into existence. It just means we can't totally discard that theory (even though it was already discarded by the time we "detected" the particle). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153315) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 1:28 AM Author: concupiscible really tough guy Okay, now instead of simply being wrong, you are additionally being incoherent. I did find out that you can see IR photons though, maybe the government controls you with TV remotes. |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 1:38 AM Author: Exhilarant hissy fit alpha You can definitely feel that shit. Or watch water boil with no fire
https://physics.info/thermo-first/ |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:53 AM Author: Submissive hell physicists HATE Nsam! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153229) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:53 AM Author: infuriating love of her life library Its when Tony and everyone else refused to visit Paulie in the can. Led to quite a row when Paulie was mad enough about it that he told Johnny Sack about Ralph's Ginny fat joke. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153230) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:55 AM Author: concupiscible really tough guy When she goes star-gazing, the galaxies have to hide THEIR food! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153235) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:54 AM Author: Exhilarant hissy fit alpha The Paui exclusion principle: it's not a "law" because particles can ignore it. Otherwise they would call it Pauli's law.
But it's also not described as a character of the particles. Instead it's presented as some overarching "principle" that an Italian man uncovered. |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:56 AM Author: concupiscible really tough guy So you just dispute it being called "principle" instead of "theory." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153238) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:59 AM Author: Exhilarant hissy fit alpha No, I think "principle" is an accurate descriptor. It lets you know up front that it's not actual "law" of physics in any meaningful sense. At the same it's settled. Whoever the fuck Pauli was, the debate ended with him. Stop asking questions about this area of physics. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153242) |