![]() Quantum theory amplified Maxwell’s revolution. In James Clerk Maxwell’s equations, the fruit of that work, electromagnetic fields - not separated bodies - are the primary objects of reality. But in the 19th century, as people investigated the phenomena of electricity and magnetism more closely, Newton-style equations proved inadequate. That Newtonian framework worked brilliantly for nearly two centuries, as Newton’s equations for gravity went from triumph to triumph, and (at first) the analogous ones for electric and magnetic forces seemed to do so as well. Space, the stage, is an empty receptacle. … that one Body may act upon another at a Distance thro’ a Vacuum, without the Mediation of any thing else, by and through which their Action and Force may be conveyed from one to another, is to me so great an Absurdity, that I believe no Man who has in philosophical Matters a competent Faculty of thinking, can ever fall into it.īut in Newton’s masterpiece, the Principia, the players are bodies that exert forces on one another. Void gives particles addresses, nothing more.Īristotle famously claimed that “Nature abhors a vacuum,” but I’m pretty sure a more correct translation would be “Nature abhors a void.” Isaac Newton appeared to agree when he wrote: It means nothingness: space without independent properties, whose only role, we might say, is to keep everything from happening in the same place. ![]() Void, on the other hand, is a theoretical idealization. Intergalactic space is a good approximation to a vacuum. Alternatively, vacuum is the state of minimum energy. We say a region of space “realizes vacuum” if it is free of all the different kinds of particles and radiation we know about (including, for this purpose, dark matter - which we know about in a general way, though not in detail). Vacuum, in modern usage, is what you get when you remove everything that you can, whether practically or in principle. It involves the distinction between vacuum and void. To appreciate that surreal monologue, you need to know some backstory. It was beautiful.” And then, excited, he began an explanation that crescendoed in a near shout: “The reason space doesn’t weigh anything, I thought, is because there’s nothing there!” Finally he said dreamily, “I once thought I had that one figured out. It was the only time I’ve ever seen him look wistful. Looking to break the awkward silence that followed, I asked Feynman the most disturbing question in physics, then as now: “There’s something else I’ve been thinking a lot about: Why doesn’t empty space weigh anything?”įeynman, normally as quick and lively as they come, went silent. This month’s columnist, Frank Wilczek, is a Nobel Prize-winning physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Feynman was unimpressed, saying: “Wilczek, you should work on something real.” ( Anyons are real, but that’s a topic for another post.) QuantizedĪ monthly column in which top researchers explore the process of discovery. I described to Feynman what I thought were exciting if speculative new ideas such as fractional spin and anyons. We had a couple of hours to fill before dinner. But our visitor still wanted to talk physics. The life of a celebrated physicist is always intense. Events had included a seminar that was also a performance, lunchtime grilling by eager postdocs, and lively discussions with senior researchers. ![]() ![]() It was the end of a long, exhausting day in Santa Barbara, sometime around 1982. Richard Feynman looked tired when he wandered into my office.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |