Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the blogger are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Reason McLucus: on 6/4/07 at 4:47am UTC, wrote Do physicists still accept Bohr's theory that the absorption of specific...

Matthew Leifer: on 5/11/07 at 17:21pm UTC, wrote John Baez's protoblog This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics is about...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

John Cox: "OH! OH! Ms. Woodward Ms. Woodward! I know Iknow! It's to keep you..." in Quantum Dream Time

Georgina Woodward: "Dear Joe, if reality has nothing to do with what you think it might be, why..." in Quantum Dream Time

alice paul: "All data here is unfamiliar to me. I think Really weird. I think you have..." in Hyung Choi and the nature...

alice paul: "your link text" in Hyung Choi and the nature...

alice paul: "All data here is unfamiliar to me. I think Really weird. I think you have..." in Are We Merging With Our...

shery williams: "Kaspersky technical errors that are harming your device and its..." in Are We Merging With Our...

Lena Smith: "Though every Canon printer is manufactured with utmost proficiency, but it..." in Conjuring a Neutron Star...

Jaybee Demeester: "Cleo has proven how a skilled but beginner specialist can have an benefits..." in Plasma Tubes in the Sky


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Quantum Dream Time
Defining a ‘quantum clock’ and a 'quantum ruler' could help those attempting to unify physics—and solve the mystery of vanishing time.

Our Place in the Multiverse
Calculating the odds that intelligent observers arise in parallel universes—and working out what they might see.

Sounding the Drums to Listen for Gravity’s Effect on Quantum Phenomena
A bench-top experiment could test the notion that gravity breaks delicate quantum superpositions.

Watching the Observers
Accounting for quantum fuzziness could help us measure space and time—and the cosmos—more accurately.

Bohemian Reality: Searching for a Quantum Connection to Consciousness
Is there are sweet spot where artificial intelligence systems could have the maximum amount of consciousness while retaining powerful quantum properties?


FQXi BLOGS
November 23, 2017

CATEGORY: Blog [back]
TOPIC: Baez on Quantum Foundations [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Blogger Matthew Saul Leifer wrote on May. 11, 2007 @ 17:21 GMT
John Baez's protoblog This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics is about quantum foundational issues this week. It contains a discussion of some of the ideas that people working on the boundary of quantum foundations and quantum information have been thinking about.

I'm mentioning it not lest because he cites some of my recent work, which I consider a great honor coming from the foremost physics protoblogger. My other posting ground "Quantum Quandaries" is actually named after one of John's papers, but fortunately he doesn't seem to have noticed yet so I am safe from being sued for the timebeing.

report post as inappropriate


Reason McLucus wrote on Jun. 4, 2007 @ 04:47 GMT
Do physicists still accept Bohr's theory that the absorption of specific wavelengths of light by a gas molecule affects the energy state of its electrons rather than the old theory of Jean Baptiste Fourier that the process caused the molecule to become hotter. Climatologists seem to favor Fourier.

Fourier's theory may have made sense in the context of a model of the atom in which the atom was considered the smallest particle of matter. However, Bohr's theory is more consistent with atoms comprised of charged particles. It makes more sense for the absorption of radiation to affect the electrons instead of increasing the motion of atom/molecules. Changing motion requires an uneven impact. Absorbing radiation would seem to produce a uniform change in the electrons themselves which would seem incapable of changing motion.

If Bohr's theory is still accepted over Fourier's, why haven't physicists challenged the views of climatologists that Fourier's process is causing "global warming". That isn't the only problem with the theory. They ignore the far more likely ways humans could increase temperature especially the terracalories of heat humans generate daily.

report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.