Similar Posts

Subscribe
Notify of
3 Answers
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Physikraxi
6 months ago

*** If elementary particles have no internal structure,
how can they then have properties?

The problem with your question lies quite deeply. Especially in quantum physics, it is recommended to dispense with any kind of imaginability, even though no mathematician can understand a formula without an idea to guide their mathematical attempts to rearrange the formula. No matter how abstract that idea may be.

Therefore, no one can explain without following a thought structure or conveying it to others. Those who don't know any better or believe they can hide their lack of understanding behind the fact that your concept of structure is declared unnecessary because they believe it isn't needed in physics, because your concept of structures is reminiscent of the already obsolete mechanistic thinking of classical physics.

This is certainly true of many physicists who simply apply what they've learned, preach it, and even implement it as practically necessary. But there are no such people in research. One wonders how it's even possible for a point object to have any effect at all if it can't somehow mark its presence in its environment with information (effect).

And that is precisely what mechanistic thinking is in the narrower sense, because higher mathematics is only mental processes that exist in our heads, but which a point object cannot control in order to act in a purely mechanical way.

For example, a simple mechanical addition of two point objects is not feasible unless the quantitative quantity informs us of its presence somewhere in a spatially structural relationship as a present effect, which is characterized by its mere mechanical presence in space. This information is understood spatially mechanically as a structure. The universe cannot compute with the mental memories that humans refer to as variables in their heads; it must simply function mechanically to change the quantitative relationships so that we can then consider that as an effect.

When two points meet, it's obvious that not only do the points meet, but the effect has different intensities depending on the square of the distance. Thus, every point object in quantum physics possesses a structurally characterized sphere, in which each pixel of this sphere is characterized by a unique four-dimensional quantity and polarity.

This is necessary so that each pixel, when superimposed, can add its information quadratically to all other pixels in a single deterministic process – that is, according to a classical, purely mechanical way of thinking. Therefore, it is correct that modern physics does not require an internal structure, because research has already figured it out using the classical mechanical way of thinking.

Therefore, every elementary particle has an internal structure that carries very specific properties, such as its bidirectional property with respect to the origin, which provides information about its relative polarity. There is also quantitative information (property) and information about its outermost relationship, which we call the boundary, which provides information about the range where the object's sphere of influence ends.

I think that's enough of the properties of a highly complex structure that can tell the stupid little particles what to do.

TomRichter
9 months ago

Even in classical physics, you don't need an internal structure for a body to have mass or momentum.

hologence
10 months ago

This is the mechanistic thinking of classical physics. The ancient Greeks already asked such questions. But elementary particles are not small spheres, but merely a view within the framework of particle-wave duality.