Not easily. Its taken thousands of years of training and maybe started by Democritus. I think he only said "atom" but I would never have expected him to say "the interference of two fields".
It's my firm belief that no particles exist. What does exist is the interference of fields to create a new field.
The term "particle physics" should be renamed, "field interference theory".
What we view as particles are really only the events that occur when one energy field transfers or converts its energy to a different energy field. In the space between these events there is never anything but energy fields. The biggest problem in physics today is how to convince physicists to think this way.
Take the photon as an example. If a photon goes from A to B, it is only a particle at A and at B and anywhere between A and B there is never a particle, but only the EM field? That would allow the double slit to show interference with a single photon.
If a particle were anything other than an event, what would it be composed of?
"Particle" physics seems to me like a dogmatic religion that is accepted by people who accept authority rather than using their reasoning ability!
Comments