The Superultramodern Scientific Explanation of the Fundamental Forces

Written by Dr Kedar Joshi

Part I

The particle theorists' explanation ofrepparttar fundamental forces -

1) Explanation ofrepparttar 127624 force of repulsion -

'In quantum mechanics,repparttar 127625 forces or interactions between matter particles are all supposed to be carried by particles of integer spin - 0, 1, or 2. What happens is that a matter particle, such as an electron or a quark, emits a force - carrying particle. The recoil from this emission changesrepparttar 127626 velocity ofrepparttar 127627 matter particle. The force - carrying particle then collides with another matter particle and is absorbed. This collision changesrepparttar 127628 velocity ofrepparttar 127629 second particle, just as if there had been a force betweenrepparttar 127630 two matter particles.' ( See Hawking 1996, p. 90 )

2) Explanation ofrepparttar 127631 force of attraction -

It isrepparttar 127632 same asrepparttar 127633 description ofrepparttar 127634 force of attraction. For example, 'The gravitational force ofrepparttar 127635 sun onrepparttar 127636 earth is pictured in particle theories as being caused byrepparttar 127637 emission of a graviton by a particle inrepparttar 127638 sun and its absorption by a particle inrepparttar 127639 earth.' ( See Hawking 1996, p. 217 )

a) Deficiency -

With reference torepparttar 127640 particle theorists' description ofrepparttar 127641 force of repulsion it is quite simple to see that its explanation ofrepparttar 127642 force of attraction is totally inadequate. Byrepparttar 127643 emission and absorption of gravitonrepparttar 127644 two matter particles would rather go away ( or be repulsed ) from each other.

Conmathematical Resolution of Russell's Paradox

Written by Dr Kedar Joshi

Russell's Paradox -

'A paradox uncovered by Bertrand Russell in 1901 that forced a reformulation of set theory. One version of Russell's paradox, known asrepparttar barber paradox, considers a town with a male barber who, every day, shaves every man who doesn't shave himself, and no one else. Doesrepparttar 127623 barber shave himself ? The scenario as described requires thatrepparttar 127624 barber shave himself if and only if he does not ! Russell's paradox, in its original form considersrepparttar 127625 set of all sets that aren't members of themselves. Most sets, it would seem, aren't members of themselves - for example,repparttar 127626 set of elephants is not an elephant - and so could be said to be "run-of-the-mill". However, some "self-swallowing" sets do contain themselves as members, such asrepparttar 127627 set of all sets, orrepparttar 127628 set of all things except Julius Caesar, and so on. Clearly, every set is either run-of-the-mill or self-swallowing, and no set can be both. But then, asked Russell, what aboutrepparttar 127629 set S of all sets that aren't members of themselves ? Somehow, S is neither a member of itself nor not a member of itself.'

( See David Darling : The Universal Book of Mathematics, 2004 )

Conmathematical Resolution -

The term 'Conmathematics' means conceptual mathematics ( invented by Dr. Kedar Joshi ( b. 1979 ), Cambridge, UK ). It is a meta - mathematical system that definesrepparttar 127630 structure of superultramodern mathematics. It essentially involves a heavy or profound conceptual approach which is in striking contrast withrepparttar 127631 traditional symbolic or set theoretic approach.

Cont'd on page 2 ==> © 2005
Terms of Use