From 7b2dca420a6862ccc7521acdbee48eb23f8bd803 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Andrew
I had a brief chat with Mr. Coxon and he aclled how the existence of neutrinos were predicted “mathematically” before they were experimentally discovered physically. I do not know the history of all -this (MuonNeutrino could explain further), but Mr. Coxon said that physicists +this, but Mr. Coxon said that physicists looked at a phenomenon (I believe that was beta decay) and went like: “where did that missing energy go”? and proposed that there was a particle called a neutrino that fills in the missing gap. @@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ class="math inline">A (i. e. physics is squishy) is both true and false. Thus, A = 1 and A = 0 are both true. Then, take a random statement B -(let’s say “MuonNeutrino likes humanities”). Thus we have A + B = 1 where + is a boolean “or” operator because A = 1 and B must be 1 (if B is zero, then 0 + 0 = 0). Thus, if we can prove that “physics is squishy” and “physics is not squishy” (without differences -in definition), then we can literally prove that “MuonNeutrino likes +in definition), then we can literally prove that “Z likes humanities”. Other from not defining subjective things like “squishy” and “is” (in terms of psychology), we can’t get around this easily, and everything would be provable, which would not be fun for @@ -258,8 +258,8 @@ which sometimes simply summarizes ideas already expressed by others. Please see the attached reading materials for details. Works of Eugene Wigner were especially helpful.
Contributors include many YK Pao School students and faculty. -Insightful conversations with friends, including Muon Neutrino -:), have given me great inspiration in the ideas +Insightful conversations with friends +have given me great inspiration in the ideas expressed in this article and discussions are still ongoing. For privacy reasons other names aren’t listed, but I would be happy to put names on here at request/suggestion.
-- cgit 1.4.1-2-gfad0