Particle nature an illusion?

[Butch]

I have recently been soaking my brain in quanta... It is beginning to appear to me that fields are responsible for the illusion of particles, charge and mass... Comments?

[Strange]

8 minutes ago, Butch said:

It is beginning to appear to me that fields are responsible

https://arxiv.org/abs/1204.4616 "There are no particles, there are only fields"

https://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/particle-physics-basics/fields-and-their-particles-with-math/

[StringJunky]

You might find this lecture by Sean Carroll interesting. It's  an hour or so long but well worth your while. He ventures at some later point into the future or physics which can leave at that point if you wish.

 

Edited March 5, 2018 by StringJunky

[Butch]

Awesome! I was afraid perhaps I was stepping into a huge pile... I will take a further look at these.

Next obvious interrogative... What can be unique about fields to produce a variety of particle charge and type?

[StringJunky]

9 minutes ago, Butch said:

Awesome! I was afraid perhaps I was stepping into a huge pile... I will take a further look at these.

Next obvious interrogative... What can be unique about fields to produce a variety of particle charge and type?

With my link and Strange's, you'll be quite enlightened... they clear the mud quite a bit.

[Silvestru]

11 minutes ago, Butch said:

Next obvious interrogative... What can be unique about fields to produce a variety of particle charge and type?

frequency

[Strange]

13 minutes ago, Butch said:

Next obvious interrogative... What can be unique about fields to produce a variety of particle charge and type?

In the standard model, these are properties associated with each different type of field.

In string theory, for example, there is a single underlying model (strings) that produces all these different properties through different oscillation modes, etc.

[Butch]

Just now, Silvestru said:

frequency

Seems that would have to be it... I see a paradox relating frequency to charge...

I haven't a problem accepting frequency for determining particle type or even mass but how can frequency determine charge... Phase?

4 minutes ago, Strange said:

In the standard model, these are properties associated with each different type of field.

In string theory, for example, there is a single underlying model (strings) that produces all these different properties through different oscillation modes, etc.

You know, all this is drawing me back to the underlying framework and the absolute universe thing...

[Silvestru]

35 minutes ago, Butch said:

Seems that would have to be it... I see a paradox relating frequency to charge...

I haven't a problem accepting frequency for determining particle type or even mass but how can frequency determine charge... Phase?

Hmm that's a bit more (and too) complicated for me but  it has to do with gauge symmetry. Basically frequency doesn't determine charge. Actually as far as I know I'm aware, we don't know why some fundamental particles have the charge that they do. 

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauge_theory

 

 

Edited March 5, 2018 by Silvestru

[Butch]

I think I have a method for attacking this problem. The discussion will be under speculations under "Macro or micro, where to begin".