On Tuesday, July 29, 2025 at 7:35:57 PM UTC-6 Brent Meeker wrote:
On 7/29/2025 4:47 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: On Tuesday, July 29, 2025 at 2:22:50 PM UTC-6 John Clark wrote: On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 4:12 PM Alan Grayson <[email protected]> wrote: *> But is it proven* *Yes, but not all proofs are mathematical, some proofs are physical, that's why physicists need to perform experiments. No mathematician in previous centuries, no matter how intelligent, could've sat in his armchair with a notepad and derived quantum mechanics. * *John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>* In the UP/DN case of electrons passing through the SG apparatus, the spin might be non-existent, Electrons are spin 1/2 particles. But as I've noted several times, you don't send electrons, or any charged particles, thru an SG. just another quantum number. But the fact that the electrons respond to the magnetic field as they do, in opposite directions, strongly suggests IMO that they have real physical spin. Silver atoms are used because they have a big magnetic moment. Hence, the idea of modeling them as orthogonal instead of anti-parallel makes no sense. AG Spin UP and spin DN are orthogonal in Hilbert space. In 3-space they are anti-parallel. Brent Naive question; how do those silver atoms know they're in Hiibert space, and not 3-space.? AG -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/72459d03-cf7c-4eed-a635-cdc997209918n%40googlegroups.com.
