Archive for May, 2008

Internet and free academic

May 15, 2008

In some extent, academia is a closed system. And it is very successful to improve academic for a very long time, but times is changing because of  PC and Internet.    Today we have open access e-prints––ArXiv for nearly 17 years old and many documents of science of various  Webs, but we still can not research only by internet. In this planet, the number of those who are talent and willing strongly to do serious academic but can not enter academia for various  reasons is very  big. Advancing of Science is continuous, researchers need to command all relative literatures of the topics of research. So ArXiv or other internet resources can not help free researchers on outside of academia to do true academic. For example, searching papers of Dirac on internet, you  can get very few papers of free access, and it can not help you to understand RQM using so few papers. It is a true pity for copyright!!
I deeply appreciate  Richard Stallman  for his persisting of Open Source in order of freedom and expanding of knowledge. Such as

I don’t have a problem with someone using their talents to become successful, I just don’t think the highest calling is success. Things like freedom and the expansion of knowledge are beyond success, beyond the personal. Personal success is not wrong, but it is limited in importance, and once you have enough of it it is a shame to keep striving for that, instead of for truth, beauty, or justice.

or

The idea of copyright did not exist in ancient times, when authors frequently copied other authors at length in works of non-fiction. This practice was useful, and is the only way many authors’ works have survived even in part. The copyright system was created expressly for the purpose of encouraging authorship. In the domain for which it was invented–books, which could be copied economically only on a printing press–it did little harm, and did not obstruct most of the individuals who read the books.

http://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html

etc.

So I believe Stallman is a true hero of our times, he should get Nobel prize of Peace. In the inspiring of his spirit of open source of software, I think all should be open source especially for documents of science and  hope that it do not take very long to reach this  target. Let talent persons do true interesting and valuable things to improve the blessing of Human beings.

It is freedom, and it is knowledge.

QFT and the foundaton of QM

May 2, 2008

The most successful theory in the physics may be QFT, it is the application of QM. Most physicists(mainstream) believe that QM has been established in about 1927, but Einstein felt not so satisfactory with it and challenged Bohr times again, the celebrating fruit was EPR paper in 1935. After that, Bohm published his two “hidden variable” papers in 1952, and J.S.Bell published his “Bell inequalities” in 1964 ,which is a great paper. Since 90s QI or QC’s increase show Bell’s deep insight, there is someone who asserts Bell is the greatest man in the 20th century. For example ,see here:

Quantum theory is the most successful scientific theory of all time. Many of the great names of physics are associated with quantum theory. Heisenberg and Schrödinger established the mathematical form of the theory, while Einstein and Bohr analysed many of its important features. However, it was John Bell who investigated quantum theory in the greatest depth and established what the theory can tell us about the fundamental nature of the physical world.

This is a big advance in foundation of QM, but it seams not product some fruits in QFT. Most physicist think QFT has established in 70’s, although there so many physicists to seek TOE, QG, SUSY, and few think the relation of QFT and the foundation of QM.

It is safe to say that no one understands quantum mechanics. R.P.Feynman the character of physical law (1967,p129)

Honest Feynman! But Feynman seamed be happy at QED, because its precision to data of experiments, he is attributed to the phrase “shut-up-and-calculation”. He is no unsatisfactoriness with QM like Einstein,even Bohr,in spite of ugly renormalization. Today,those masters like Steven Weinberg,Edward Witten ,etas, do not talk more about the foundation of QM, and maybe there are no any problems in the foundation of QM,as Fuchs and Peres said,”we would be the last to claim that the foundations of quantum theory are not worth further scrutiny.”(Fuchs2000a) which is about “Interpretation of QM”, but “Entanglement” is so important in QM and do not appear in standard text of QM, and do it product big effects in QFT ?