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 author 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

Ian Harris: on 9/27/14 at 2:28am UTC, wrote Very intriguing subject matter! Your video was very informative! If you...

Jonathan Dickau: on 9/26/14 at 1:26am UTC, wrote Hello again Norman, I see not much action here, which is sad. I hope you...

Norman Cook: on 9/11/14 at 4:43am UTC, wrote Many thanks, Jonathan. I agree. The video format makes it easier to...

Jonathan Dickau: on 9/11/14 at 1:45am UTC, wrote I thought this was excellent Norm! Not only do you make your point well,...

Norman Cook: on 8/22/14 at 23:45pm UTC, wrote Dear Mr. Roth! I will comment on your own contribution elsewhere, but...

Norman Cook: on 8/22/14 at 22:52pm UTC, wrote Hi Ed, Thanks for the comments. The only radical idea in the video is...

Alexander Roth: on 8/22/14 at 15:38pm UTC, wrote Dear Mr. Cook, If one of the goals of the FQXi video contest is to expose...

Ed Unverricht: on 8/15/14 at 21:37pm UTC, wrote Very nicely done. Your geometric representation provokes much thought....


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Jason Wolfe: "Joe, What you are saying sounds like mathematics. But mathematics doesn't..." in First Things First: The...

Joe Fisher: "Jason, You can only unnaturally make an infinite number of finite written..." in First Things First: The...

Jason Wolfe: "As for religious fundamentalists, I would rather deal with them, then with..." in More on agency from the...

Jason Wolfe: "The best we can do with the environment is to plant more trees and..." in More on agency from the...

gmail login: "Thanks a lot for the post. It has helped me get some nice ideas. I hope I..." in Bonus Koan: A Lake of...

Georgina Woodward: "Steve, I don't think the quantum representation of the hydrogen atom is an..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Agnew: "You are very good at defending a classical macroscopic and objective..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

SAJ Real Estate: "Nice one. Real Estate Sales St Kitts" in A Close Encounter


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.


FQXi FORUM
November 16, 2019

CATEGORY: Show Me the Physics! Video Contest (2014) [back]
TOPIC: Quantum Nucleodynamics by Norman D. Cook [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Norman D. Cook wrote on Aug. 8, 2014 @ 21:51 GMT
Video Image





Video URL

http://youtu.be/eNX0tmbFUtE



Video Description

The quantum physics of the atomic nucleus is notoriously difficult, but this video demonstrates its underlying 3D geometry. That doesn't make the many-body problem of nuclear structure theory exactly "easy", but the geometry of nuclear states is comprehensible to anyone who can comprehend the three dimensions of Cartesian space. Welcome to Quantum Nucleodynamics.

Video Creator Bio

I have spent a career trying to understand the phenomena of the human mind and the structure of the atomic nucleus.

Bookmark and Share



Ed Unverricht wrote on Aug. 15, 2014 @ 21:37 GMT
Very nicely done. Your geometric representation provokes much thought. Especially important is to see energy levels and magic numbers pop out of the model.

Hopefully it inspires physicist to re-consider the importance of models in representing properties of particles.

Bookmark and Share


Norman D. Cook replied on Aug. 22, 2014 @ 22:52 GMT
Hi Ed,

Thanks for the comments.

The only radical idea in the video is that "geometry is important" . In that regard, I think that the modeling of 3D structure should precede more sophisticated dynamic modeling. Those two approaches aren't necessarily contradictory, but, in the nuclear realm, if you start with the wrong 3D structure (a liquid drop or a miniature gas or a simple cubic lattice) you will end up spending a Ptolemaic career adding epicycles and fancy dynamics to fix the mistakes in your starting structure!

It may seem crazy to go back to 1937, but Wigner had the correct face-centered cubic lattice for the nucleus way back then (Physical Review 51, 106, 1937)… and not many of us have had the stomach to return to that insight and rebuild nuclear structure physics from that starting point!

Bookmark and Share



Alexander Roth wrote on Aug. 22, 2014 @ 15:38 GMT
Dear Mr. Cook,

If one of the goals of the FQXi video contest is to expose interesting physics ideas and concepts, regardless whether new or seasoned, to an audience of interested and curious viewers, this video accomplishes that. The video graphics are excellent. This area of physics is one I’ve had very little contact with and this presentation has inspired digging a little further into the references cited. For these reasons the video fulfils the best goals of the FQXi competition.

Wishing you success in the contest.

Alexander Roth (Special Rel …..)

Bookmark and Share


Norman D. Cook replied on Aug. 22, 2014 @ 23:45 GMT
Dear Mr. Roth!

I will comment on your own contribution elsewhere, but thank you for your comments on mine.

Clearly, the video format allows us to revisit old problems in a new way - and just might make our ideas easier to digest. It is paradoxical, I think, but the discipline of physics is to reduce complex multidimensional ideas to simple mathematical formulae, but the efficient communication of those ideas is not necessarily working backwards from the formula to the original concepts. For some, the mathematical route is okay, but for others the mathematics is easier to understand if it follows a didactic, step-by-step presentation of the overall concept. In the end, both routes are essential, but these issues in fundamental physics are much too important to leave them to the mathematical whiz-kids.

Bookmark and Share



Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Sep. 11, 2014 @ 01:45 GMT
I thought this was excellent Norm!

Not only do you make your point well, but you also are making a point that should inform and uplift the establishment - if people are listening. The greatest value of a contest like this is that it lets ground-breaking work like yours receive some attention, rather than being completely ignored. I hope you end up among the finalists, so the experts will be made to see this important work.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share


Norman D. Cook replied on Sep. 11, 2014 @ 04:43 GMT
Many thanks, Jonathan.

I agree. The video format makes it easier to introduce the basics of what are ultimately rather complex ideas.

It might even be worthwhile for the "serious journals" to ask that an author makes a 5-minute video to give the broader context of the research. The details will of course follow in the written report, but the underlying motivation is also important...

Cheers

Norman

Bookmark and Share



Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Sep. 26, 2014 @ 01:26 GMT
Hello again Norman,

I see not much action here, which is sad. I hope you got the paper I sent to your e-mail at Kansai, an unfinished draft about my Mandelbrot research. I wish that a few more people had found your wonderful video, and I think it deserves to do well, but you may not even get the minimum number of votes required - which is a shame. This is definitely a topic I'll want to follow up on, after the contest has concluded.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share



Ian C Harris wrote on Sep. 27, 2014 @ 02:28 GMT
Very intriguing subject matter! Your video was very informative!

If you get a chance I'd really appreciate it if you gave our video a watch and rated it too!

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2189

Thanks in advance,

Ian Harris

Bookmark and Share



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.