q*d
发帖数: 22178 | 1 据说不能和Schwinger提及Feynman 规则,一旦你提到
Feynman规则,Schwinger就会说他不知道什么是Feynman规则,
但是你走进他的办公室,又会发现满黑板的Feynman图 |
C********n
发帖数: 6682 | 2 http://www.douban.com/group/topic/6086266/
【在 q*d 的大作中提到】
: 据说不能和Schwinger提及Feynman 规则,一旦你提到
: Feynman规则,Schwinger就会说他不知道什么是Feynman规则,
: 但是你走进他的办公室,又会发现满黑板的Feynman图
|
C********n
发帖数: 6682 | 3 谣言版
盖尔曼貌似曾经跟schwinger关系不错，经常去schwinger家
然后别人就问盖尔曼见没见过Schwinger用费曼图
盖尔曼说，我从来没见过他用费曼图
但是，盖尔曼又补充说，Schwinger他们家有个房间是上了锁的，从来不让我进
【在 q*d 的大作中提到】
: 据说不能和Schwinger提及Feynman 规则,一旦你提到
: Feynman规则,Schwinger就会说他不知道什么是Feynman规则,
: 但是你走进他的办公室,又会发现满黑板的Feynman图
|
q*d
发帖数: 22178 | |
q*d
发帖数: 22178 | 5 这俩都讨厌Feynman,有共同语言啊.
一个口头上不承认Feynman规则,一个独一无二的把Feynman规则叫strulkberg规则,
再加上Dirac这个"我会接受重整化要是它不是那么丑陋的话"
物理界真是什么鸟都有
【在 C********n 的大作中提到】
: 谣言版
: 盖尔曼貌似曾经跟schwinger关系不错，经常去schwinger家
: 然后别人就问盖尔曼见没见过Schwinger用费曼图
: 盖尔曼说，我从来没见过他用费曼图
: 但是，盖尔曼又补充说，Schwinger他们家有个房间是上了锁的，从来不让我进
|
C********n
发帖数: 6682 | 6 no
别人转载的
我没账号在douban
【在 q*d 的大作中提到】
: 那是你的马甲吧?
|
b*******k
发帖数: 1761 | 7 木秀于林，风必摧之。不说别的，如果FEYNMAN能活得长一点，估计CALTECH得凝聚态会
比现在好得多。
【在 q*d 的大作中提到】
: 这俩都讨厌Feynman,有共同语言啊.
: 一个口头上不承认Feynman规则,一个独一无二的把Feynman规则叫strulkberg规则,
: 再加上Dirac这个"我会接受重整化要是它不是那么丑陋的话"
: 物理界真是什么鸟都有
|
h*********6
发帖数: 2469 | 8 zkss.
【在 b*******k 的大作中提到】
: 木秀于林，风必摧之。不说别的，如果FEYNMAN能活得长一点，估计CALTECH得凝聚态会
: 比现在好得多。
|
E**E
发帖数: 103 | 9 shwinger从来白天睡觉晚上工作？那他结婚了没？
【在 C********n 的大作中提到】
: http://www.douban.com/group/topic/6086266/
|
q*d
发帖数: 22178 | 10 老毛也是昼伏夜出的,
老婆三个,女人一群
【在 E**E 的大作中提到】
: shwinger从来白天睡觉晚上工作？那他结婚了没？
|
|
|
q*d
发帖数: 22178 | 11 quark是Gell-Mann先提出的,等发现Bjorken scaling,
显示quark是存在的,Feynman要把那本该叫quark的玩意叫parton,
据说把Gell-Mann同学气的七窍生烟
【在 b*******k 的大作中提到】
: 木秀于林，风必摧之。不说别的，如果FEYNMAN能活得长一点，估计CALTECH得凝聚态会
: 比现在好得多。
|
E**E
发帖数: 103 | 12 原来parton就是夸克？ 记得粒子课上讲什么parton distribution function，一直也
没明白parton是个什么玩艺。
那shwinger到底结婚了没？ 我要是昼伏夜出的老婆肯定疯掉
【在 q*d 的大作中提到】
: quark是Gell-Mann先提出的,等发现Bjorken scaling,
: 显示quark是存在的,Feynman要把那本该叫quark的玩意叫parton,
: 据说把Gell-Mann同学气的七窍生烟
|
C********n
发帖数: 6682 | 13 结婚了
parton 是 sea quark
【在 E**E 的大作中提到】
: 原来parton就是夸克？ 记得粒子课上讲什么parton distribution function，一直也
: 没明白parton是个什么玩艺。
: 那shwinger到底结婚了没？ 我要是昼伏夜出的老婆肯定疯掉
|
C********n
发帖数: 6682 | 14 feynman 这点相当不怎么样
【在 q*d 的大作中提到】
: quark是Gell-Mann先提出的,等发现Bjorken scaling,
: 显示quark是存在的,Feynman要把那本该叫quark的玩意叫parton,
: 据说把Gell-Mann同学气的七窍生烟
|
q*d
发帖数: 22178 | 15 这俩不知道谁先得罪谁的..
哈哈哈..一帮顽童啊
【在 C********n 的大作中提到】
: feynman 这点相当不怎么样
|
C********n
发帖数: 6682 | 16 不知道
不过feynman一辈子貌似没有自己独立先于他人做出来的东西
呵呵
【在 q*d 的大作中提到】
: 这俩不知道谁先得罪谁的..
: 哈哈哈..一帮顽童啊
|
b*******k
发帖数: 1761 | 17 路径积分也不是么？
【在 C********n 的大作中提到】
: 不知道
: 不过feynman一辈子貌似没有自己独立先于他人做出来的东西
: 呵呵
|
q*d
发帖数: 22178 | 18 那个是他翻版了Dirac的文章,
甚至就有人认为路径积分是Dirac发明的
【在 b*******k 的大作中提到】
: 路径积分也不是么？
|
b*******k
发帖数: 1761 | 19 哦。 历史一搞细了就搞不清了，难怪杨李会吵架，西方的那帮家伙也不是好鸟啊
【在 q*d 的大作中提到】
: 那个是他翻版了Dirac的文章,
: 甚至就有人认为路径积分是Dirac发明的
|
b****s
发帖数: 1300 | 20 这个我是赞同的。所以很多人把Feynman的地位排在老杨前面，我持保留意见。
【在 C********n 的大作中提到】
: 不知道
: 不过feynman一辈子貌似没有自己独立先于他人做出来的东西
: 呵呵
|
|
|
c****e
发帖数: 2097 | 21 I heard it's just a footnote in PAM Dirac's book, but I cannot find a
single footnote in that book, so it must not be all true.
It's like proving 'Fermat's" last 'theorem', 就是没功劳，苦劳也是有的。
Dirac这本小书很牛比，string theorist人必一用的DBI action是equation 4-39.
【在 q*d 的大作中提到】
: 那个是他翻版了Dirac的文章,
: 甚至就有人认为路径积分是Dirac发明的
|
C********n
发帖数: 6682 | 22 its in the book
【在 c****e 的大作中提到】
: I heard it's just a footnote in PAM Dirac's book, but I cannot find a
: single footnote in that book, so it must not be all true.
: It's like proving 'Fermat's" last 'theorem', 就是没功劳，苦劳也是有的。
: Dirac这本小书很牛比，string theorist人必一用的DBI action是equation 4-39.
|
w****1
发帖数: 4931 | 23 Frankly I don't feel that inventing Yang-Mills theory is such a big deal.
Even without Yang sooner or later mathematicians would have come up with YM
theory -- it's just a connection on vector bundles. In physics (and many
other fields of science of course), the devil is in the details. For
instance, figuring out how to renormalize Yang-Mills theory is a bigger deal
than inventing Yang-Mills theory itself, IMHO.
【在 b****s 的大作中提到】
: 这个我是赞同的。所以很多人把Feynman的地位排在老杨前面，我持保留意见。
|
q*d
发帖数: 22178 | 24 据我所知,不是那本书,而是Dirac的一篇文章:
Dirac's seminal paper “The Lagrangian in Quantum Mechanics'' [Physikalische
Zeitschrift der Sowjetunion, Band 3, Heft 1 (1933)]
以前上场论的时候,我们教授给每人复印发了一份,里面有这么句话:
corresponds to exp(i∫Ldt/h)
我记得Feynman说过他为了弄懂这句话才搞出来path integral的
【在 c****e 的大作中提到】
: I heard it's just a footnote in PAM Dirac's book, but I cannot find a
: single footnote in that book, so it must not be all true.
: It's like proving 'Fermat's" last 'theorem', 就是没功劳，苦劳也是有的。
: Dirac这本小书很牛比，string theorist人必一用的DBI action是equation 4-39.
|
q*d
发帖数: 22178 | 25 Clay研究所悬赏100万刀求证Yang-Mills场有mass gap.
这个大概比重整化还难吧,不过我没懂哪个问题什么意思
YM
deal
【在 w****1 的大作中提到】
: Frankly I don't feel that inventing Yang-Mills theory is such a big deal.
: Even without Yang sooner or later mathematicians would have come up with YM
: theory -- it's just a connection on vector bundles. In physics (and many
: other fields of science of course), the devil is in the details. For
: instance, figuring out how to renormalize Yang-Mills theory is a bigger deal
: than inventing Yang-Mills theory itself, IMHO.
|
b****s
发帖数: 1300 | 26 I'm afraid that I cannot agree with you on that being difficult means
being more important,or in your words, a bigger deal. "it's just a
connection on vector bundles", what an easy statement, which can be made by
people 50 years after the birth of YM theory! If I didn't remember it wrong
(correct me if I was), it was still Yang, who first introduced to the
physics community the geometrical meaning of YM theory by means of fiber
bundles.
YM
deal
【在 w****1 的大作中提到】
: Frankly I don't feel that inventing Yang-Mills theory is such a big deal.
: Even without Yang sooner or later mathematicians would have come up with YM
: theory -- it's just a connection on vector bundles. In physics (and many
: other fields of science of course), the devil is in the details. For
: instance, figuring out how to renormalize Yang-Mills theory is a bigger deal
: than inventing Yang-Mills theory itself, IMHO.
|
w****1
发帖数: 4931 | 27 I am not saying that more difficult means more important. I'm saying that
you only understand something when you understand the details. If you have a
beautiful framework but can't calculate anything then it's no good.
Understanding renormalization is important because without renormalization
you can't do any computation in quantum Yang-Mills theory, and it just
happens that this time it isn't a trivial thing to figure out. The problem
with the mass gap is less important from the physics perspec
【在 b****s 的大作中提到】
: I'm afraid that I cannot agree with you on that being difficult means
: being more important,or in your words, a bigger deal. "it's just a
: connection on vector bundles", what an easy statement, which can be made by
: people 50 years after the birth of YM theory! If I didn't remember it wrong
: (correct me if I was), it was still Yang, who first introduced to the
: physics community the geometrical meaning of YM theory by means of fiber
: bundles.
:
: YM
: deal
|
b*******k
发帖数: 1761 | 28 你对那个引力的理论怎么看
http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/11/24/1955209/New-Theory-of-Gravity-Decouples-Space-amp-Time?art_pos=7
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=splitting-time-from-space
a
【在 w****1 的大作中提到】
: I am not saying that more difficult means more important. I'm saying that
: you only understand something when you understand the details. If you have a
: beautiful framework but can't calculate anything then it's no good.
: Understanding renormalization is important because without renormalization
: you can't do any computation in quantum Yang-Mills theory, and it just
: happens that this time it isn't a trivial thing to figure out. The problem
: with the mass gap is less important from the physics perspec
|
N***m
发帖数: 4460 | 29 人家躺在被窝里面搂着老婆乐呢，你们在这里却争个面红耳赤的，好笑阿
a
【在 w****1 的大作中提到】
: I am not saying that more difficult means more important. I'm saying that
: you only understand something when you understand the details. If you have a
: beautiful framework but can't calculate anything then it's no good.
: Understanding renormalization is important because without renormalization
: you can't do any computation in quantum Yang-Mills theory, and it just
: happens that this time it isn't a trivial thing to figure out. The problem
: with the mass gap is less important from the physics perspec
|
w****1
发帖数: 4931 | 30 That's not what I sound like in a heated debate; that was just me
chatting leisurely in a coffee break.:)
【在 N***m 的大作中提到】
: 人家躺在被窝里面搂着老婆乐呢，你们在这里却争个面红耳赤的，好笑阿
:
: a
|
|
|
w****1
发帖数: 4931 | 31 I don't think Horava proposed his theory as an "altnerative theory of
gravity" that is supposed to describe the real world. It was just a toy
model to understand possible UV completions of gravity. It is of much
importance to understand the UV completions of gravity, which is one of
the primary achievements of string theory, but it is still important to
know if there are UV completions that does not involve strings, in
particular whether there is a UV completion of pure gravity without an
infini
【在 b*******k 的大作中提到】
: 你对那个引力的理论怎么看
: http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/11/24/1955209/New-Theory-of-Gravity-Decouples-Space-amp-Time?art_pos=7
: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=splitting-time-from-space
:
: a
|
b****s
发帖数: 1300 | 32 Here is our difference. You think that to make a beautiful framework
practical is more important than to invent/discover the framework itself,
whereas I buy the opposite. Certainly, an impractical but beautiful
framework is not that meaningful to reality. Nevertheless, without a
potentially correct framework, where is any practical development going to
be based? IMHO, innovative foundational works are always more important than
any technical or further theoretical developments based on them. Any
【在 w****1 的大作中提到】
: I am not saying that more difficult means more important. I'm saying that
: you only understand something when you understand the details. If you have a
: beautiful framework but can't calculate anything then it's no good.
: Understanding renormalization is important because without renormalization
: you can't do any computation in quantum Yang-Mills theory, and it just
: happens that this time it isn't a trivial thing to figure out. The problem
: with the mass gap is less important from the physics perspec
|
b****s
发帖数: 1300 | 33 呵呵，老杨的拥趸QED都没出马，我起个什么劲啊。;-)
【在 N***m 的大作中提到】
: 人家躺在被窝里面搂着老婆乐呢，你们在这里却争个面红耳赤的，好笑阿
:
: a
|
V*********t
发帖数: 1478 | 34 中国发明了火药，欧洲发明了大炮
虽然没有大炮的中国打不过有大炮的欧洲，但是因为中国发明了火药，而欧洲只是发明
了火药的用途，所以中国发明了火药更重要
than
I
it
【在 b****s 的大作中提到】
: Here is our difference. You think that to make a beautiful framework
: practical is more important than to invent/discover the framework itself,
: whereas I buy the opposite. Certainly, an impractical but beautiful
: framework is not that meaningful to reality. Nevertheless, without a
: potentially correct framework, where is any practical development going to
: be based? IMHO, innovative foundational works are always more important than
: any technical or further theoretical developments based on them. Any
|
q*d
发帖数: 22178 | 35 我确实比较欣赏Yang-Mills理论,
个人认为20世纪理论物理里最美的三个工作:
狭义相对论,Dirac方程,Yang-Mills理论.
不过我对老这种争吵早已厌倦...点名也不想再说了.
【在 b****s 的大作中提到】
: 呵呵，老杨的拥趸QED都没出马，我起个什么劲啊。;-)
|
C********n
发帖数: 6682 | 36 你把GR放到哪里啊
太弱了
【在 q*d 的大作中提到】
: 我确实比较欣赏Yang-Mills理论,
: 个人认为20世纪理论物理里最美的三个工作:
: 狭义相对论,Dirac方程,Yang-Mills理论.
: 不过我对老这种争吵早已厌倦...点名也不想再说了.
|
w****1
发帖数: 4931 | 37 It is of course a matter of taste. Beautiful, or trivial? You could say
that the most important works are the ones that turn out to be trivial.
In other words, it becomes so fundamental that we take it for granted
afterwards. Such as special relativity. But I still like the kind of
hard results that is nontrivial even after you understand it.
itself,
going to
important than
Anyway, I
standard; it
【在 b****s 的大作中提到】
: Here is our difference. You think that to make a beautiful framework
: practical is more important than to invent/discover the framework itself,
: whereas I buy the opposite. Certainly, an impractical but beautiful
: framework is not that meaningful to reality. Nevertheless, without a
: potentially correct framework, where is any practical development going to
: be based? IMHO, innovative foundational works are always more important than
: any technical or further theoretical developments based on them. Any
|
q*d
发帖数: 22178 | 38 我个人不喜欢引力几何化这种概念.
纯个人感觉,这也要争个强弱?
纯属有病
【在 C********n 的大作中提到】
: 你把GR放到哪里啊
: 太弱了
|
b****s
发帖数: 1300 | 39 I tend to believe that when some theory is nontrivial even after you
understand it, there should exist a more fundamental underlying theory that
is otherwise less nontrivial. ;-)
【在 w****1 的大作中提到】
: It is of course a matter of taste. Beautiful, or trivial? You could say
: that the most important works are the ones that turn out to be trivial.
: In other words, it becomes so fundamental that we take it for granted
: afterwards. Such as special relativity. But I still like the kind of
: hard results that is nontrivial even after you understand it.
:
: itself,
: going to
: important than
: Anyway, I
|
w****1
发帖数: 4931 | 40 then you'd really hate it if particle physics is geometrized.:)
【在 q*d 的大作中提到】
: 我个人不喜欢引力几何化这种概念.
: 纯个人感觉,这也要争个强弱?
: 纯属有病
|
|
|
w****1
发帖数: 4931 | 41 Unfortunately, my friend, mathematics isn't all trivial, even if physics
is.:)
that
【在 b****s 的大作中提到】
: I tend to believe that when some theory is nontrivial even after you
: understand it, there should exist a more fundamental underlying theory that
: is otherwise less nontrivial. ;-)
|
q*d
发帖数: 22178 | 42 那是不可能发生的
【在 w****1 的大作中提到】
: then you'd really hate it if particle physics is geometrized.:)
|
b****s
发帖数: 1300 | 43 为何你能欣赏YM这样的几何化，却不喜欢引力几何化？
【在 q*d 的大作中提到】
: 我个人不喜欢引力几何化这种概念.
: 纯个人感觉,这也要争个强弱?
: 纯属有病
|
w****1
发帖数: 4931 | 44 Actually, it is already being done. F-theory GUT, if works (there are
some technical subtleties), would be the only natural explanation of
flavor hierarchy known to mankind at this point.:)
【在 q*d 的大作中提到】
: 那是不可能发生的
|
w****1
发帖数: 4931 | 45 Both YM and GR follow from unitarity+Lorentz invariance. Beautiful or
not, they are forced upon you.
【在 b****s 的大作中提到】
: 为何你能欣赏YM这样的几何化，却不喜欢引力几何化？
|
c****e
发帖数: 2097 | 46 by mankind you mean cumrun and his students.
【在 w****1 的大作中提到】
: Actually, it is already being done. F-theory GUT, if works (there are
: some technical subtleties), would be the only natural explanation of
: flavor hierarchy known to mankind at this point.:)
|
T*********r
发帖数: 11175 | 47 probably.
and I don't think it even includes Taizan Watari.
【在 c****e 的大作中提到】
: by mankind you mean cumrun and his students.
|
q*d
发帖数: 22178 | 48 experiments will kill it.:)
【在 w****1 的大作中提到】
: Actually, it is already being done. F-theory GUT, if works (there are
: some technical subtleties), would be the only natural explanation of
: flavor hierarchy known to mankind at this point.:)
|
q*d
发帖数: 22178 | 49 GR把引力几何化为时空弯曲,
比较希望时空就是时空,相互作用就是相互作用
【在 b****s 的大作中提到】
: 为何你能欣赏YM这样的几何化，却不喜欢引力几何化？
|
w****1
发帖数: 4931 | 50 hello? this is 21st century.
【在 q*d 的大作中提到】
: GR把引力几何化为时空弯曲,
: 比较希望时空就是时空,相互作用就是相互作用
|
|
|
s*****i
发帖数: 467 | 51 "shwinger" in the tile
【在 q*d 的大作中提到】
: 据说不能和Schwinger提及Feynman 规则,一旦你提到
: Feynman规则,Schwinger就会说他不知道什么是Feynman规则,
: 但是你走进他的办公室,又会发现满黑板的Feynman图
|
