Complete separation from ti?
At this mont in the conference room, Edward Witten and Peter Schultz began a series of brainstorms.
This can even be considered quite a daunting philosophical topic.
For instance, in this model, they may unify the four fundantal forces and complete the initial proof of the Grand Unified Theory. Thus, the so-called universe is a discrete space, and then the question arises: under this system, am I yesterday, today, and tomorrow still the sa ?
Peter Schultz directly voiced this question.
Yes, if there is no ti to string the world together, and space is divided into distinct subspaces, like individual cells, such an intriguing paradox arises. The at different tis is a completely new , and each is an eternal existence.
On the microscopic level, it’s widely known that the existence of many particles is extrely brief. So brief that it cannot even be described as a mont before annihilating. But if this theory is correct, all particles exist eternally in the theoretical sense.
And what about causality?
If there is no ti dinsion, how are the chanisms of causality transmission between these different subspaces explained?
Yes, when Qiao Ze derived these formulas, both n contemplated a lot. Edward Witten even began to consider how to find theoretical foundations for Q theory through philosophical conditions of identity.
For instance, using self-identity and experiential continuity as criteria. In such circumstances, if you have consistent cognition and experience across different subspaces, then it can be considered that these subspaces’ are the sa .
But Qiao Ze obviously didn’t need Edward Witten’s help; his pen never stopped as he directly explained: "This is not a paradox. For example, we can completely use the consistency of quantum states for explanation.
If your quantum state in each subspace is interrelated and follows the sa physical laws, then these different subspaces of you can be considered different manifestations of the sa quantum state, thus the sa you."
"Moreover, I didn’t say that space is discrete; spatial continuity doesn’t necessarily require ti to connect. It can maintain its consistency through various chanisms. But under this structure, many of our calculations beco much simpler."
Actually, the only troubleso aspect is that we need to redefine speed; to choose suitable spatial paraters to replace ti in describing motion. For example, spatial rate of change, this requires redeveloping all montum and dynamic equations afresh, such as wave equations, Lorentz forces, and so on."
There are certainly also changes in the classical chanics system. It’s quite complex, and I might need to read so literature, but intuition tells this is at least a relatively correct path; much better than having no direction previously."
Having said this, Qiao Ze paused his writing.
The originally blank draft paper was now filled with various formulas he had just derived, displaying a particularly harmonious beauty.
"First, annotate how you’ve defined Fij here?"
"Gauge field strength, Fij = ∂iAj - ∂jAi [Ai, Aj], Di is the covariant derivative, which equals ∂i plus the commutative action against different physical quantity X, naly [Ai, ⋅]. Of course, if it’s concerning a vector field, covariant derivative needs to include the non-trivial actions of the gauge field."
...
Physics is indeed a magical subject.
When choosing majors, those with experience would advise young students that biochemical engineering material sciences are like dead-end majors; don’t touch them.
Mathematics belongs to disciplines for the gifted; if not gifted, best not to dabble.
Moreover, there’s the saying that studying dicine brings divine retribution.
But when specific to Physics, very few give qualitative assessnts.
It seems no one says Physics is a dead end, and it doesn’t seem to require a prodigious talent. Especially during high school, be it chanics, electricity, electromagnetism, or optics, it seemingly isn’t too difficult.
If you’re just of normal intelligence, basically as long as one is willing to spend ti and accept everything the physics textbooks say as accurate, without stubborn resistance, even with diocre math scores, there’s a good probability of scoring well in college entrance exams.
This often creates an illusion that physics is far simpler than mathematics.
But once truly delving into physics research, one realizes the difficulty isn’t in the subject itself but in the high school and even university stages where learned physics knowledge is particularly simple. Like a towering mountain, seen from afar with incense flourishing, with large temples every few steps and a statue inside.
People like Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, Richard Feynman, Jas Maxwell...
It’s not that people upon divine mountains choose foreign idols. Mainly, the foundation of modern science is crafted by these individuals. From aerospace and missile systems to the tens of billions or even hundreds of billions of transistors in a small CPU, they’re all rooted in theories proposed by these individuals.
If gods genuinely exist in this world, these people really could achieve divine status. When God created the world, he wouldn’t dare make it so abstract.
Perhaps for ordinary people, they can’t comprehend that a simple click of the mouse first needs translating into binary signals before processing.
Reviews
All reviews (0)