![]() ![]() ![]() That's only true for 19th-century classical thermodynamics, not for quantum mechanics. The whole reason we use this math is that there isn’t anything else like it.” In “Existential Physics” by Sabine Hossenfelder Interestingly, the usual explanation for energy loss from black holes, attributed to Hawking evaporation, is an over-simplified analogy which falls down at the question: "how does the negative-energy virtual particle know to fall into the black hole and not the positive one?”Also interestingly, it's a cousin of the fallacy popular among climate-change deniers that the atmosphere can't radiate IR light (heat) back to the ground because the ground is warmer and heat can't flow from a cold to a hot body. They don’t have to be ‘like’ anything else - because in most cases, they are not. They don’t need to be interpreted, and they don’t need to make intuitive sense. ![]() Abstract mathematical structures, I think, are best dealt with on their on terms. “I am very much a math person, and personally I don’t see the need to translate math into everyday language. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |