News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Inside the proton, the ‘most complicated thing you could ... by JumpCrisscross on Wednesday February 14, 2024 @05:30PM (#39376483)
> why must protons and electrons be perfectly complementary regarding charge?

According to QED's spin origin of charge, it's because charge comes from spin. What values a particle's spin can take are restricted to certain integer or half-integer values.

Re:Inside the proton, the ‘most complicated thing you could ... by gwerbret on Wednesday February 14, 2024 @07:34PM (#39377604)
> According to QED's spin origin of charge, it's because charge comes from spin.

Children have the remarkable ability to see the world as it truly is, and so are able to ask the most profound questions. As adults, we learn to obfuscate our, ah, knowledge deficiencies in various ways, and so lose that ability over time. I'm of the opinion that great physicists are like children in being able to see through to the heart of the matter, and ask -- and answer -- questions that matter. This is certainly a theme you can see with Einstein, Bohr, Feynman, and others.

Why do I say this? Because GP's question was profound, and saying "it's because charge comes from spin" is the sort of obfuscatory answer I see most physicists give very, very often when they're faced with such questions.

That's completely aside from the fact that "it's because charge comes from spin" is entirely incorrect. All charged particles have spin, but not all particles with the same spin and other similar properties are charged.

Re:Inside the proton, the ‘most complicated thing you could ... by JumpCrisscross on Thursday February 15, 2024 @02:12PM (#39387068)
> saying "it's because charge comes from spin" is the sort of obfuscatory answer

If you refuse to ask further questions, yes. If you keep asking why, it opens the door to what charge fundamentally is.

> All charged particles have spin, but not all particles with the same spin and other similar properties are charged

Spin and charge are fundamentally connected. That said, I was answering according to SOC, which remains a hypothesis.

Re:Inside the proton, the ‘most complicated thing you could ... by calamari4065 on Wednesday February 14, 2024 @06:11PM (#39376907)
That just deflects the question one level down without explaining anything.

"Because it is" is not a helpful answer to "why?"

Re:Inside the proton, the ‘most complicated thing you could ... by JumpCrisscross on Wednesday February 14, 2024 @06:15PM (#39376946)
> deflects the question one level down without explaining anything

There’s a lot of levels to SOC. Which do you think is “because it is?”

If you’re asking why spin values are restricted, it’s in the spin-statistics theorem [1]. If you’re asking why spin causes charge, that’s SOC. There are lifetimes of understanding contained within those layers.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin–statistics_theorem

Re:Inside the proton, the ‘most complicated thing you could ... by ravi-delia on Wednesday February 14, 2024 @06:18PM (#39376965)
The question wasn't "why do protons have +1 charge", it was "why do protons have +1 charge, *considering electrons have -1 charge". The fact that possible charges are restricted to a few values is a much more satisfying answer to the latter than the former
Re:Inside the proton, the ‘most complicated thing you could ... by marton78 on Wednesday February 14, 2024 @07:12PM (#39377425)
Physics doesn't attempt to answer the question "why", it answers "how".
Re:Inside the proton, the ‘most complicated thing you could ... by magicalhippo on Wednesday February 14, 2024 @08:30PM (#39378063)
Richard Feynman addresses a similar "why" question in a great way in this interview[1], and how "why" questions are problematic in science.

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36GT2zI8lVA

Re:Inside the proton, the ‘most complicated thing you could ... by empath-nirvana on Wednesday February 14, 2024 @09:19PM (#39378378)
You eventually have to take _something_ as given.
Re:Inside the proton, the ‘most complicated thing you could ... by gus_massa on Wednesday February 14, 2024 @09:07PM (#39378296)
I never heard this. I'm almost sure it's wrong. Do you have a link?