L
Linusthe2nd
Guest
This is something you have to read for yourself, it is difficult but thorough. So to encourage the viewers here is a teaser. The analysis is by Michael Flynn - it is not for the faint of heat. But to keep you interested, the author spices things up with humor and lots of information and a good background in the principles of Aristotelian - Thomistic philosophy.
And what did Werner Heisenberg, one of the founders of modern physics say about atoms, protons, etc?
" There should be a rule that the first person to raise quantum theory (or rather, the Copenhagen Interpretation of the mechanics) loses the debate immediately. It’s not as if everything’s all settled for good. (See Popper for details.) Even in quantum mechanics, things don’t move themselves, parts move wholes, and so on. In this context, and especially for those who object to the whole potency-act thingie or the idea of formal causation, two quotes of Werner Heisenberg, whom we might call “Mr. Quantum Theory” himself, are apropos:
“[T]he atoms or elementary particles themselves are not real; they form a world of potentialities or possibilities rather than one of things or facts.”
and
“[T]he smallest units of matter are not physical objects in the ordinary sense; they are forms, ideas which can be expressed unambiguously only in mathematical language.”
(Heisenberg belonged to the last generation of physicists to move comfortably in philosophy.¹ It was also the last generation to make breakthrough discoveries in physics. No doubt a coincidence.)
An objector once cited protons as an example of things that assembled themselves, that they did so back in the Long Ago times of physics legend. Of course, self-assembly is what nature does.² But it is the quarks (assuming they exist) that assemble into protons (assuming they exist). The proton is the final cause of the quark. (Yes, and so is the neutron.) And the gauge bosons would seem to be the efficient causes. But the proton hardly poofs itself into being all by itself.
Clarifications:
– Commentary on Physics II.8, lecture 14, no. 268
tofspot.blogspot.com/2014/10/…ig-kahuna.html
But the argument starts here:
tofspot.blogspot.com/2014/08/first-way-moving-tale.html
Linus2nd
And what did Werner Heisenberg, one of the founders of modern physics say about atoms, protons, etc?
" There should be a rule that the first person to raise quantum theory (or rather, the Copenhagen Interpretation of the mechanics) loses the debate immediately. It’s not as if everything’s all settled for good. (See Popper for details.) Even in quantum mechanics, things don’t move themselves, parts move wholes, and so on. In this context, and especially for those who object to the whole potency-act thingie or the idea of formal causation, two quotes of Werner Heisenberg, whom we might call “Mr. Quantum Theory” himself, are apropos:
“[T]he atoms or elementary particles themselves are not real; they form a world of potentialities or possibilities rather than one of things or facts.”
and
“[T]he smallest units of matter are not physical objects in the ordinary sense; they are forms, ideas which can be expressed unambiguously only in mathematical language.”
(Heisenberg belonged to the last generation of physicists to move comfortably in philosophy.¹ It was also the last generation to make breakthrough discoveries in physics. No doubt a coincidence.)
An objector once cited protons as an example of things that assembled themselves, that they did so back in the Long Ago times of physics legend. Of course, self-assembly is what nature does.² But it is the quarks (assuming they exist) that assemble into protons (assuming they exist). The proton is the final cause of the quark. (Yes, and so is the neutron.) And the gauge bosons would seem to be the efficient causes. But the proton hardly poofs itself into being all by itself.
Clarifications:
- Heisenberg’s insights. See also the precis of the Heisenberg-Lukacs discussions (1968) in Ch.3 “History and Physics,” in Lukacs, Remembered Past: a Reader (ISI Books, 2005) Lukacs’ greatest surprise was that none of the other physicists with whom he discussed the matter seemed interested in the implications of the Uncertainty Principle. They acknowledged it was true, but were not inclined to follow Heisenberg’s lead. The flight from philosophy had already begun.
- self-assembly is what nature does. Recall Aquinas:
– Commentary on Physics II.8, lecture 14, no. 268
tofspot.blogspot.com/2014/10/…ig-kahuna.html
But the argument starts here:
tofspot.blogspot.com/2014/08/first-way-moving-tale.html
Linus2nd