Quote:
Originally Posted by Suzy_A
Sorry, but I disagree. CP IS wrong AND incomplete. But I am not saying that it does not have validity. What I said is that it is a USEFUL approximation for most occurances. The Lorentzian Transformation (which is a part of Special Relativity) states that t = t0/(1-v2/c2)^0.5, where t is the appratent time, t0 is the time at rest, v is the velocity and c is the velocity of light in a vacuum. On the other hand, Classical Physics states that t = t0.
What it means is that there is time-dialation for a object moving with respect to an observer at t0 at a velcity v.
At 10 metres a second past a multinova, the time dialation is about 0.000000000000055%, which is not really that noticable. But at 299,500,000 m/s it is about 2265%, which would be quite noticable.
A similar transformation exists for length and an inverse one for mass.
But of course not much on earth travels at speeds close to c - unless its in a cyclotron or a high energy (eg therapy) x-ray machine, in which case it is relevent.
But on a cosmological scale, these relativistic velocities, masses and lengths are relevent and so relativity and quantum does make a difference. A good example was the failure of classical physics in accounting for the procession of Mercury, but which was easily explained by Einstein.
Classical Physics is wrong - but still very, very useful.
As for Paul's comment that "The physicists I know, live quite modestly and earn far, far less than they could in private industry.", yes that's right. As a nuclear medicine physicist that does dosimetry for radiotherapy (and if I get it wrong I kill someone - but haven't done that yet....), I earn about 1/5 to 1/10 what someone earns digging holes at a WA minesite.
|
Susan, no need to explain lorentzian transforms and such to me, I do know a bit about GR/SR and Quantum Theory
However, you still don't see what I'm saying....although I suspect it's nothing more than how we interpret what we mean by wrong and incomplete that's the problem here. There's nothing wrong with Classical Physics....it just doesn't fully explain what we've come to know about the laws which govern reality. It's an approximation, just as SR/GR and Quantum Theory are nothing more than approximations of what is actually occurring. We may think we know all there is to know, or feel we know a great deal, but I'm pretty much on solid ground when I say that we're only just started to understand the nature of existence. We haven't even touched on things, yet...even with much of the stuff we think we know something about.
About pay packets. Yes, you'd earn more in some fields than in others, but I can tell now from simple experience that I would much rather be a GP or a lawyer than a geologist, considering that I could earn $140-$180K a year, with my experience (can't work due to medical problems), and either one of them can quickly get into 6 and 7 figure pay packets...far more than I could ever earn.