|
Re^6: Organizational Culture (Part VII): Science
by eyepopslikeamosquito (Archbishop) on Sep 15, 2021 at 08:43 UTC
|
> many felt that "bending space and time" was obviously too absurd to survive further scrutiny
Agreed. Einstein similarly felt it was obviously too absurd for nature to allow a black hole to exist -
despite it being predicted by his own equations! :)
The first exact solution of the Einstein field equations was provided,
not by Einstein, but Karl Schwarzschild, a German soldier stuck in a foxhole on the Russian front during WW1.
Schwarzchild further calculated the Schwarzschild radius, defining the event horizon of a Schwarzschild black hole.
Calculating the first exact solution of the Einstein field equations proved
more alluring than the mundane chore of computing artillery trajectories it seems.
Tragically, Schwarzschild did not survive the war.
Sadly,
Einstein mocked Belgian Catholic priest Georges Lemaitre's
"hypothesis of the primeval atom" (aka "Cosmic Egg" aka Big Bang theory)
with the cutting quote
"Your calculations are correct, but your grasp of physics is abominable"
... missing a golden opportunity to scoop Edwin Hubble by predicting an expanding universe.
Lemaitre took this opportunity
by publishing his expanding universe theory, despite Einstein's objections, and so
was (belatedly) recognized for predicting an expanding universe two years before Hubble, with
Hubble's Law now also known as the Hubble-Lemaitre Law
(not the Hubble-Einstein Law).
Wait, there's more tragedy!
To fit the then accepted model of a steady state universe, Einstein added the Cosmological constant to his field equations.
From Dark energy (wikipedia):
The cosmological constant was first proposed by Einstein as a mechanism to obtain a solution of the gravitational field equation that would lead to a static universe,
effectively using dark energy to balance gravity. Einstein gave the cosmological constant the symbol capital lambda.
Einstein stated that the cosmological constant required that 'empty space takes the role of gravitating negative masses which are distributed all over the interstellar space'.
The mechanism was an example of fine-tuning, and it was later realized that Einstein's static universe would not be stable:
local inhomogeneities would ultimately lead to either the runaway expansion or contraction of the universe.
After Einstein admitted his blunder by removing the cosmological constant (and deeply regretting adding it in the first place),
others later reinstated it
as a perfect way to describe the mysterious new Dark energy!!
You can't write this stuff. :)
Update Physics Today:
I heard Einstein say to Gamow about the cosmological constant, "That was my biggest blunder of my life" -- John Archibald Wheeler
| [reply] |
|
|
| [reply] |
|
|
I'm a bit rusty on all this stuff. From Dark energy (wikipedia):
The "cosmological constant" is a constant term that can be added to Einstein's field equation of general relativity.
If considered as a "source term" in the field equation, it can be viewed as equivalent to the mass of empty space
(which conceptually could be either positive or negative), or "vacuum energy".
The simplest explanation for dark energy is that it is an intrinsic, fundamental energy of space.
This is the cosmological constant, usually represented by the Greek letter Λ (Lambda, hence Lambda-CDM model).
Since energy and mass are related according to the equation E = mc2, Einstein's theory of general relativity predicts
that this energy will have a gravitational effect.
It is sometimes called a vacuum energy because it is the energy density of empty space - the vacuum.
There is a minor problem with this though:
the discrepancy between theoretical calculation and observed value is 120 orders of magnitude!!! ...
making it a leading candidate for "the largest discrepancy between theory and experiment in all of science". :)
On a more positive note, the precision of narrowing down the Age of the universe
(via the Lambda-CDM model) to 13.772±0.040 billion years blows my mind.
| [reply] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re^6: Organizational Culture (Part VII): Science
by eyepopslikeamosquito (Archbishop) on Sep 17, 2021 at 10:12 UTC
|
> that's why he wasn't awarded the NP for RT. Too many felt that "bending space and time" was obviously too absurd to survive further scrutiny.
> Don't forget that Einstein's position to Quantum Theory was comparable. He didn't deny the results but opposed the statistical model. "God does not play dice" ! ;)
Curiously, despite Quantum Theory out-weirding Relativity, the 1932 Nobel Prize
was awarded to Werner Heisenberg for the creation of Quantum mechanics!
Maybe the general tolerance of weirdness within the Nobel committee had softened by then.
Heisenberg was nominated for the Nobel prize by ... Einstein! ... which I felt showed great character,
given his deeply held "God does not play dice" views.
The infamous Bohr-Einstein debates, though insanely intense at times,
were also carried out in great spirit by both men.
Though Erwin Schrodinger also won a Nobel prize
for his famous wave equation (developed
during a romantic tryst on a skiing holiday), I was disappointed the committee didn't award him another for inventing
Schrodinger's Cat. :)
BTW, Schrodinger and Einstein shared a similar extreme discomfort with QM and seemed to be allies during
the many heated QM debates of the 1930s.
My favourite Nobel prize story though is
J J Thomson
winning the 1906 Nobel prize for proving the electron is a particle
and his son G P Thomson winning the 1937 Nobel prize for proving it's a wave! :)
This was the golden age of physics LanX and all played out in your backyard!
As a physics nut, I'm extremely envious because I'd love to visit Germany one day to tour all these historic sites ...
including Heligoland where Heisenberg formulated Quantum Mechanics -- have you ever been there?
I find it interesting that the two biggest QM breakthroughs, by Heisenberg and Schrodinger, were both made while on holiday.
| [reply] |
|
|
I find it interesting that the two biggest QM breakthroughs, by Heisenberg and Schrodinger, were both made while on holiday.
I'm reminded of another revolutionary innovation made under such circumstances: the penning of Frankenstein by Mary W. Shelley.
It was written in Geneva, but was inspired by
German ghost stories,
visits to sites in Germany (such as the town near Frankenstein Castle),
and current topics in science and pseudo-science.
Furthermore, climateology and geology played a role: the party were hunkered down in Byron's place in Geneva
during the year without a summer, due mainly to
the 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora, which caused a "volcanic winter".
I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon staffed with 16,000 zombies.
| [reply]
[d/l] |
|
|
| [reply] |
|
|
| [reply] |
|
|
> This was the golden age of physics LanX and all played out in your backyard!
Yes the Nobel prize was mostly a German party till the 50s. Mainly because much of modern universities and education were invented by the Humboldts. Plus the polycentric structure of central Europe where each little sovereign needed at least one academy, (my region alone has maybe a dozen "capitals"). This created a very fertile ground for science and technology in the 19th century.
Britain in contrast centralized most in "Oxbridge", with classical colleges concentrating on law and theology.
> As a physics nut, I'm extremely envious because I'd love to visit Germany one day to tour all these historic sites ...
I'm afraid there is not that much to see.
I was once in Göttingen visiting a friend studying there. It's a very nice students town, but couldn't spot any boxes filled with semi-dead cats tho.
Unfortunately I needed a train to get there, the wormholes were out of service.
> including Heligoland where Heisenberg formulated Quantum Mechanics -- have you ever been there?
No, and unlikely I ever will.
It's Germany's only "real" island in the very north 40km off shore and tiny. One can go there by ship to buy tax free and enjoy local folklore fostered for tourism, but I never was much of a shanty singer.
Tho the Brits had a famous big bang experiment there, I might go to watch a rerun ...
> I find it interesting that the two biggest QM breakthroughs, by Heisenberg and Schrodinger, were both made while on holiday.
Theoretical Physics like Mathematics mainly happen inside tormented heads trying hard to find solutions and fighting against blockades.
Stories from revelations while relaxing in the nature are plenty, I somehow remember a cartoon showing Poincare (?) making a discovery while cutting trees.°
update
Hey... you can meet and "get physical" with Olivia Newton-John in your "backyard"! Just realized her mother was born Born ... ;-)
Update
°) Turns out that Poincaré published about such kind of subconscious creativity to solve problems in your sleep.
| [reply] |
|
|
Very interesting!
World Class physicists are extremely rare on this side of the planet. :(
Australia had Mark Oliphant during WW2 and claims Dark Energy discoverer and Nobel Prize winner Brian Schmidt,
even though he was born and raised in USA.
I'll give the Kiwis the legendary Ernest Rutherford, though his nationality was officially British.
> Britain in contrast centralized most in "Oxbridge"
Some prominent Oxbridge physicists:
Heisenberg developed Matrix mechanics.
Schrödinger developed Wave mechanics.
Dirac showed they were equivalent. And predicted antimatter.
Dirac was quite a character, excruciatingly awkward in social situations.
His Cambridge friends defined a unit called a "dirac", one word per hour.
I love the way he criticised J. Robert Oppenheimer's interest in poetry:
"The aim of science is to make difficult things understandable in a simpler way; the aim of poetry is to state simple things in an incomprehensible way. The two are incompatible." :)
> you can meet and "get physical" with Olivia Newton-John in your "backyard"! Just realized her mother was born Born
Max Born was her grandfather. Wow, that's a huge surprise!
Schrödinger hated Matrix mechanics so intensely that he spoiled a romantic getaway inventing
Wave mechanics.
Matrices are rarely used in Physics, so most working physicists gleefully switched to the Schrödinger wave equation.
Though it worked well, nobody knew what was actually waving, how to interpret Psi?
Schrödinger tried to interpret its modulus squared as a charge density, but was unsuccessful.
When it was later successfully interpreted (by Max Born!) as the probability amplitude,
Schrödinger was horrified, saying later "I do not like quantum mechanics, and I am sorry I ever had anything to do with it". :)
| [reply] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [reply] |
|
|
