5 replies to this topic

[TerryStonefield]

Reverse engineering the atom by smashing it apart will never give us complete insight into it's functions. To truly understand the atom we must build one from scratch. This is because any two components, combined, function as a, third, new one(we are never really 'seeing' an actual base ingredient). If the, as may be possible, the components can be broken down infinitely then we will always be dealing with the by-products (of two or more components). However if we can discover materials that, when combined, lead to infinite by-products 'inwards', and a complete atom 'outwards' then we will truly understand the nature of atomic construction. Furthermore, those two (or more) components combined to 'incite' the existence of an atom may be anywhere along the spectrum of it's construction. Seeing as these components create a 'chain-reaction' of construction in both directions, they themselves may theoretically begin at any 'level'.

Edited by TerryStonefield, 09 February 2013 - 03:45 PM.

[Cognitivo]

Aren't they smashing mostly protons to protons and not complete atoms? Besides where would you start reverse engineering because outcame of the collision is unknown before the collision?

[TerryStonefield]

The thing is that to truly understand the atom we want to avoid reverse engineering. This is because reverse engineering is never the best way to truly understand any function. Example: You could tell somebody the E=mC2, and then try to explain to them what exactly that means, and what the ideas are behind it. However if you have someone start from zero, and by their work, their own trials and errors they reach the same conclusion that individual will have an infinitely better understanding of it's function and meaning. Furthermore no matter how much we divide, and reverse engineer the atom we can never be 100% sure that we've 'got all the parts'. Only by building one from scratch can we ever truly understand the construction of the atom, and by extension manipulate it any way that we desire. The process by which to attempt this construction would be seeded in experimentation with vibrations. The correct assembly of various vibrations, and the correct amplitudes should make it possible to 'pop' an atom into existence.

[Cognitivo]

1. "Why is there something rather than nothing?" --> Lawrence Krauss; vacuum, empty space which isn't empty at all but full of quantum fluctuations. If you haven't watched this one it's on YouTube, highly recommended lecture.

2. Maybe you were referring to string theory with those "vibrations" which btw. isn't Krauss' area of interest at all.

[TerryStonefield]

1. Hello,,,Well 'Something from nothing' is obviously just what it appears to be. However n reality nothing doesn't exist..
Furthermore thanks for the tip on the video I'll take a look.

2. Yes I was referring to string theory, and even though that in itself is a form of reverse engineering,,,it is as close to nothing as we have so it's the 'cleanest' place to start engineering from. One possibility though is that the base construction of the Universe is far to simple for our complex human minds to comprehend.

[serengetilion]

Great comment