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: Mind-boggling Doctorate 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: Mind-boggling Doctorate (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153162) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:30 AM Author: indecent toilet seat 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: Mind-boggling Doctorate 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: Mind-boggling Doctorate 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: excitant new version pit 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: Mind-boggling Doctorate Exhibit a (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153227) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:54 AM Author: excitant new version pit 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: Mind-boggling Doctorate "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: excitant new version pit 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: Mind-boggling Doctorate 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: excitant new version pit 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: Mind-boggling Doctorate 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: excitant new version pit More evidence for photon: 0 pinocchios Inconsequential: 5 pinocchios https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon_tomography |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 1:18 AM Author: Mind-boggling Doctorate 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: excitant new version pit 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: Mind-boggling Doctorate 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: excitant new version pit 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: Mind-boggling Doctorate 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: sepia background story physicists HATE Nsam! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5457899&forum_id=2#47153229) |
|
Date: December 10th, 2023 12:53 AM Author: Comical Iridescent Library Jap 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: excitant new version pit 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: Mind-boggling Doctorate 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: excitant new version pit 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: Mind-boggling Doctorate 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) |