That is my point, there is no medium. Gross means in big broad general terms.
So I guess my question still stands -- How did you come by the idea that all matter is waves of nothing? Obviously you didn't measure everything and determine that it was all waves of nothing. Did Feynman say it? Did your professor say it? or is it your own idea, based on Feynman's and other's work? In science it is common and good for the teller of an idea to say "Here's how I came to the conclusion.."
As I told you before, I believe I picked up the term 'waves of nothing' from Laughlin or at least Laughlin produced the ahah factor with me. I think he also explained the emergent properties concept to the point that I understood it too.
By the way, I was wondering - have you read all four of the volumes entirely, that you recommended to me?
Not only that, I have worked out a lot of the math in the 3 Feynman volumes. You will understand what I just said if you ever read them : )
Also, you never (at least directly) answered my request to tell me what "field" means to you. I've just been using the dictionary definition - but it seems to have a meaning to you beyond that, which I can't figure out.
The short answer is that there is simply no quick and dirty answer to what a field is other than it doesn't exist, but it is observable and measurable : ) Is that a contradiction? Well not really, because you don't actually measure and observe the field.
Let me give you something else to think about : ) When you create a field it propagates at the speed of light to infinity. Once the field has been stabilized how fast are the changes in the field? In other words when you look at the Sun, you are seeing it about 7 minutes behind where it actually is, but if you had a sensitive gravity sensor where would it point? At the sun you see or 7 minutes ahead of the sun you see? The answer will help you understand what a field is, it is not a simple concept.
To answer your main question, where did I learn this stuff? Mostly reading and studying, lots of reading and studying, and a few observations and experiments. I know my way around a lab pretty well. I am not someone to take things on faith so I have tried to repeat and get the same same results that are reported. In short, I am a blind man stumbling around trying to figure out where I am.
I gotta run right now, but will read more and respond more later.
Thanks,
-Jesse
Why not the standard dictionary definition of "7. Physics A region of space characterized by a physical property, such as gravitational or electromagnetic force or fluid pressure, having a determinable value at every point in the region." ?
... other than it doesn't exist, but it is observable and measurable : ) Is that a contradiction? Well not really, because you don't actually measure and observe the field.
By this same reasoning wouldn't you also say that distance does not exist? (I seriously want to know your response to this.)
And I think you are in error or at least sly in stating that we don't actually measure the field. We don't measure light, either, we measure it's intensity. (Or its frequency or polarization.) But that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist!
For that matter, we can't observe light either -- we only observe what it does to things it hits or otherwise interacts with.
Unless you're talking about a realm which entirely different from the standard realm (which which case you should say that 'There is simply no quick and dirty answer to what a field is in thus-and-such-a-strange-realm.' There certainly IS a very nice quick definition of what a field is in the normal realm.
Just like the fact that we don't observe light but it's effects, and we don't measure light but it's intensity, the same is true for an electric or magnetic field. In an electric field, the strength of the electric field can be measured at any point by the force that it exerts on an electron. Millikan of course used this in his oil droplet experiment. So how can you say that a field cannot be measured?
When you create a field it propagates at the speed of light to infinity.
I think you're being overly dogmatic here. For example, an electric field can be set up completely and entirely contained inside a metal enclosure. For example, if you welded shut a metal box with a 9v battery inside, there would be an electric field inside which would not propagate to infinity.
In other words when you look at the Sun, you are seeing it about 7 minutes behind where it actually is
Please help me out here. If the sun orbited the earth, I'd say you're right. But considering that the earth is rotating while being bathed in the sun's rays, I don't see how you can be right.
I remember well as a child playing in the summer with the garden hose. I would stand there and swing it back and forth as fast as I could, and I could see that the stream of water traveled away from me in a sort of arc. As I did this near a fencepost, I could see that by the time the water hit the post, I wasn't aiming at the post anymore.
But now imagine if I was just standing still pointing the stream of water at the post, but the post was turning -- an observer on the post, as soon as he comes around to my side, will see me exactly where I am because that's where I've been.
Please explain why the sun is about 7 minutes ahead of where it appears. (I honestly want to understand this one, too.) And this one shouldn't require QM, QED, or Relativity to understand!)
I think I know what your problem is. I'd say you think the sun orbits the earth and that you don't know what a field is :-)
Thanks,
-Jesse
Perhaps you meant to say that the sun is 7 minutes ahead of the angular position it was at 7 minutes ago, when it emitted the light that you now see. Either that, or you are a geocentrist.
And why is it 7 minutes, by the way?
Let me give you something else to think about, too :)
Lets say that I'm on a mountaintop park, where there is a merry go around. It's a beautiful bright sunny warm morning, and as I sit on the merry go around, I look out and notice that the sun is exactly horizontal. Now let us further pretend that I get the merry go around rotating at 17 minutes per turn. This way, it'll have turned 180 degrees in the time it takes the light to reach the earth from the sun. So now let's say I have a very sensitive gravity meter which can measure the sun's gravitational pull.
Now let me ask you - which way will the sun's gravity appear related to it's light? Will the gravity of the sun be in the east while its gravitational pull will be toward the west? I don't think so :-)
-Jesse