As forewarned, CERN has presser tomorrow on Higgs

[David Morris]

This discussion should not end this soon.

Existence, Mass (not RC), Measurement, not meta.

More please.

On Friday, July 6, 2012, Monte Davis wrote:

> Umm… by no means all photons are virtual particles.  ****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* owner-pynchon-l at waste.org <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'owner-pynchon-l at waste.org');> [mailto:owner-pynchon-l at waste.org<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'owner-pynchon-l at waste.org');>]
> *On Behalf Of *Prashant Kumar
> *Sent:* Friday, July 06, 2012 7:37 AM
> *To:* Monte Davis; pynchon -l
> *Subject:* Re: As forewarned, CERN has presser tomorrow on Higgs****
>
> ** **
>
> What I meant is that you have the same debate regarding identity and
> individuality, but in the modern debate the object is not souls but quantum
> mechanical particles. In fact, the mathematical definition of photons is
> what leads to this debate: because they are massless, photons do not
> experience proper time they are known as 'virtual particles' and exist
> outside of the reality of massive particles, in some sense. Now since every
> photon is identical, you have serious problems defining identity. Think
> 'spirit world', and you have the connection to Duns Scotus' haecceities.**
> **
>
> ** **
>
> Prashant****
>
> ** **
>
> On 6 July 2012 18:40, Monte Davis <montedavis at verizon.net<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'montedavis at verizon.net');>>
> wrote:****
>
> In defense of physicists (of whom I am not one):  what distinguishes
> massless particles (e.g. photons) from scholastic word-spinning is that (1)
> their properties are unambiguously, mathematically defined; (2) those
> p[roperties have led to a century of predictions verified to many decimal
> places; and (3) they are the only properties consistent with such
> irrelevant
> arcana as stars shining, atoms cohering, and DVD lasers playing.
>
> My apologies to Abelard and Duns Scotus if that's the kind of thing they
> were doing and I missed it.****
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pynchon-l at waste.org <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'owner-pynchon-l at waste.org');> [mailto:owner-pynchon-l at waste.org<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'owner-pynchon-l at waste.org');>]
> On Behalf****
>
> Of Paul Mackin
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 12:24 PM
> To: pynchon-l at waste.org <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'pynchon-l at waste.org');>
> Subject: Re: As forewarned, CERN has presser tomorrow on Higgs****
>
> On 7/5/2012 11:35 AM, David Morris wrote:
> > OK, I stand corrected.  Existence w/o mass.  I expect such existence
> > would never become more organized than at the sub-atomic level.  But
> > I'm no physicist.
>
> Me neither, but somehow I'm reminded of the Medieval controversy over the
> distinction between essence and existence, if any.
>
> P
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Monte Davis <montedavis at verizon.net<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'montedavis at verizon.net');>
> >
> wrote:
> >> It bestows mass; they haven't [yet] gotten around to a field/particle
> >> that "bestows existence."
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  From  David Morris
> >> Higgs is the new either, a medium that bestows existence.
> >>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20120706/198ec25c/attachment.html>