One of the replies to my question on StackExchange was that what really mattered was that something is accelerated. Since acceleration is really(?) a matter of a change in energy of the thing accelerated, perhaps the most fundamental interaction is the transfer of energy from one entity (whatever an entity is) to another. Do we have any reasonable way to talk about how that happens?
*-- Russ Abbott* *_____________________________________________* *** Professor, Computer Science* * California State University, Los Angeles* * My paper on how the Fed can fix the economy: ssrn.com/abstract=1977688* * Google voice: 747-*999-5105 Google+: plus.google.com/114865618166480775623/ * vita: *sites.google.com/site/russabbott/ CS Wiki <http://cs.calstatela.edu/wiki/> and the courses I teach *_____________________________________________* On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 2:09 PM, Stephen Guerin <stephen.gue...@redfish.com>wrote: > Along the lines that Lee is mentioning with fields being the first > class objects, Bruce Sherwood may be able to illuminate some of the > current thinking in Quantum Field Theory and how interpretations are > made with respect to forces. > > Bruce? > > -Stephen > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 1:36 PM, <lrudo...@meganet.net> wrote: > > Russ asks: > > > >> Is there a mechanistic-type explanation for how forces work? For > example, > >> two electrons repel each other. How does that happen? Other than saying > >> that there are force fields that exert forces, how does the > electromagnetic > >> force accomplish its effects. What is the interface/link/connection > between > >> the force (field) and the objects on which it acts. Or is all we can > say is > >> that it just happens: it's a physics primitive? > > > > I have the impression that the best you can say is that fields act on > fields; fields are (the > > only) first-class objects, and what you're calling "objects" are at best > second-class--they > > are epiphenomena of fields (or, of *the* field). > > > > There is (or was when I last tried to look into this, about 40 years > ago) a concept of > > "current" (which I suppose is a generalization of our familiar "electric > current", but if so > > is such a generalization that I was unable to see the connection at all) > which was in some way > > involved with interactions of fields. Maybe a Google search on current > and Jakiw would turn > > up something useful, but probably not. > > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
