This list is so Garrulous

[Tony Alfrey]

David A. Bandel wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 16:14, Bill Campbell <linux-sxs at celestial.com> wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
>> Physics has changed quite a bit since I was an undergraduate
>> Math and Physics major at Johns Hopkins 45 years ago, at least
>> when it gets down into the subatomic particles and the associate
>> mathematical models.

I would say that what you studied has not changed, but that more stuff 
has been added in an attempt to explain the Standard Model and to cook 
up something (supersymmetry) to combine all the known forces into one at 
extremely high energies.  And to unify it with other stuff (like 
inflation) that we expect happened real early in the big bang, or to 
explain the matter/antimatter asymmetry.


>>  I thought I was doing well to understand
>> the Schroedinger equations and similar stuff, but I don't have a
>> clue about string theory and such.
> 
> There are probably only a handful of folks in the world that actually
> understand string theory and the math behind it.


Can you say "Kaluza Klein" three times fast?
;-)


> And as a theory it
> might be all well and good, but it certainly doesn't explain
> everything.  Not to mention that no one can either prove or disprove
> it.

You might mention why, i.e. that building an exavolt accelerator is not 
likely to happen any time soon.  We /may/ get a Higgs Boson pretty soon 
if the kids at CERN can learn how to solder ;-)
But Feynman always liked looking for lower-energy manifestations of 
theories that might otherwise require unattainable energies.  The 
Casimir effect is an example.

<snip>


-- 
Tony Alfrey
tonyalfrey at earthlink.net
"I'd Rather Be Sailing"