Adaugat la data: 2010-08-19
de catre: danutza
Numar pagini: 23
Tip document: .doc
Nivel: Liceu
Dimensiune: 39.0 KB
Downloads: 1
Credite: 0

Din referat: Biris's errors of judgement

BIRIS'S ERRORS OF JUDGEMENT

But it seems that the fining of the democritian model regarding the explication of the behavior of quarks can be made better by Anaxagora, rather than by Platon.

For some of the fundamental properties of Anaxagora's holomers can be proved to be specific also to quarks.

Respective, the model of holomers allows an unlimited divisibility in depth (as pretends also the democrition model), but requires in the same time the inseparability (alike with quarks) and the idea of qualitative differentiating (by which the accent does not fall on the sphere of quantitative, of a divisibility in depth only as endless fractionizing, but on the infinite diversity of ratios from the fundamental combinations).

The working of this ideas in the model of quarks presents us an intersting picture.

The infinite divisibility in microcosmos cannot be thought by quantitative fragmentation, as an endless progress towards more and more tiny particles, but by its transferation in a qualitative prime plan, what means that at a given moment it would be possible to arrive however at a limit of fractionizing, of quantitative division, at particles without constituents, at ,,ultimate” entities. 

The infinity and the divisibility in depth will be given then by the qualitative infinity, by the infinity of the correlations and the combinations of this ,,ultimate particles”(Biris, 1989).

If the quantitative division can arrive at a ,,limit of fractionizing”, at ultimate entities, then the mathematical  magnitude of the multiplicity of the ultimate entities will be finite.

But a a finite mathematical multiplicity either added or mulptiplied or fractioned or combined with other finite mathematical multiplicity it is impossible to give rise to an infinite mathematical multiplicity.

There is no any mathematical operation (•) so as x • y = ? or x • y = - ?; x and y being mathematical variables which can represent some domains of  mathematical quantities (numbers).

Local Conclusion: a finite multiplicity cannot substantiate a combinatorial or structural (qualitative) infinite diversity. Combination of n entities taken n times, if n is finite, cannot result in an infinite multiplicity.

Moreover, there is x?n so as the physical combination of n taken x times is physicaly divisible, disintegrable, fisionable etc.

,...But, with the whole this success, the model of quarks presents a paradox: even with the bighest accesible energies, obtained in the existent accelerators, until now it was proved impossible to be fragmented a hadron in its constituent quarks”(Weinberg, 1984).

With other words, the quarks put us in the following situation. By their statute of ,,ultimate” constituents of hadrons, of fundamental entities, it is pushed in prime plane the dicontinuity of existence.

But by their inseparabity it attracted our attention on the fact that we are placed, simultan, also in the presence of continuity. (Biris, 1989)  

Weinberg said only that with the bighest energies that we actualy can cause, we cannot frgmentate a hadron. Biris tried to extend the Weinberg's idea, giving the unargued impression that the quarks are absolutely inseparable.