It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
But is "Relative Configuration Space" even testable? That wasn't clear to me.
Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
I have found some dire misleading presentations in quantum physics in the tunnel diode
and potential walls saying by some chance the wall or hill is passed which breaks the
law of conservation of energy or just plain sense. The problem here is there is energy
available and thus there is no surprise. The lack of identifying the energy is the lie because
the oil companies do not want us to find it.
You throw around terms like "quantum fluctuation" as though you understood them, which I know is not the case, because not even quantum physicists understand them. As Richard Feynman said, "I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics." As I'm sure you know, Feynman was a theoretical physicist.
Originally posted by baruch60610
Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
I have found some dire misleading presentations in quantum physics in the tunnel diode
and potential walls saying by some chance the wall or hill is passed which breaks the
law of conservation of energy or just plain sense. The problem here is there is energy
available and thus there is no surprise. The lack of identifying the energy is the lie because
the oil companies do not want us to find it.
The conservation law isn't broken. All that happens is that a particle appears on the other side of a barrier. It doesn't require energy to do this, because it doesn't penetrate or surmount the barrier.
The lack of identifying the energy is a result of its not existing. The oil companies aren't that powerful. Yet.
Then why do quantum mechanics professors still cite that Feynman quote? I'm not sure you understand the quote.
Originally posted by neoholographic
Feynman's quote has nothing to do with a Physicist knowledge of quantum mechanics today.
So enlighten us. What have we learned since 1965 that invalidates Feynman's quote from 1965?
Do we know everything? no. But you do realize knowledge has increased when it comes to quantum mechanics since 1965?
So, to use a Feynman quote to try and cover up your own ignorance on the subject, makes no sense.