The recent development of elementary particle theory (contd.)

0:00 The idea states you have some sort of degeneracy, right? Now, is that degeneracy also occurring in the color? That's at least a clear answer.

20:00 Because there were some papers after. Namely, it can only go that far. It's color, and in a fairly natural way, I take certain novel predictions which are quite beyond the range of mere libertines precisely because...

22:30 I'm referring to course reception of Feynman. I also had the privilege of hearing Feynman in the early days. And you remember, this is very well known, when Feynman knew these definite lines and so on, and has never understood quantum mechanics.

25:00 You know, because of this very picturesque, you know, well-defined line here. See, this is the way I'm thinking about it. You see, if you put an algorithm in the... You can't trace that back. You can't trace that back. You can't trace that back. You can't trace that back. You can't trace that back. You can't trace that back. You can't trace that back. You can't trace that back. You can't trace that back. You can't trace that back. You can't trace that back. You can't trace that back. You can't trace that back. You can't trace that back. You can't trace that back. You can't trace that back. But I thought that, can I just, I mean, it wasn't... So I think, is your question closely related to this? Okay, well, mine is, mine is, uh... ...about the short list of possible economies.

27:30 And the point is that, how do you choose between one or another? See, although you could say that there is recycling going on, it is a selection. There are certain bits that are... So that, I mean, I think Michael's point could be put in a slightly different way, that Michael says that there are new things that come to recycling, old ideas. In fact, it's also, I mean, nothing new would come out that way. I mean, I can find these guys, for example, when they came out of some aeroplane trip or journey with two roads, you know, there's a road that falls, and then the pilot actually just sees that there are two roads, in fact, there's one road that he's got to go through. So there would be no... No, no, no, you don't have to. Right, but I'm saying that there are so many analogies. The right kind of resources there, I mean. Yes, I mean, the point is, when you say it's a crummy analogy, all I'm saying is that that notion of crummy analogy, it's saying something, there's another fact here, that it's not just a recycling of old bits, something very important, I mean, I mean, I just restate my point, that there are so many old bits available, new ones, and it seems to be very enlightening to say that science uses old bits, I mean, I think this point, you see what I mean, it's...

30:00 The human mind seems to be so rich in possible analogies that we can discover afterwards. Thank you for your attention. I can't talk about Heisenberg, I don't know anything about the details of his work. Can I just say something in support of you?

32:30 The failure of you pretty much did not help you. Well, I just wanted to say, in support of what Simon's just been saying, that if you read the exegetical articles, semi-popular exegetical articles by people like Dyson in the late 60s, and this comes across very strongly, the point about S-matrix, it is being conceived of as a rival program field there, for something, and very often there's a strong admixture of operationalist motivation. I've got to be sociological about it. Yes, but you are committed to it. So you've got a catch-all significance to it.

35:00 So there's two particles. So the atomic analogy seems to be right. You know, n equals 1 is the first particle, and 1 very much the electromagnetic transition that we could drag in more and more so. You see, that is a point I'm not quite clear about. I mean, it doesn't seem to depend on what ideology you subscribe to, that you might predict that there will be, amongst other things, electromagnetic transition from the highest level to the next lower level. This doesn't seem to be ideology, then. What's the meaning of the word? Well, you seem to say that people have this not entirely rational commitment to atomic models, I mean atomic spectroscopy. And it was this, you see, that led them, say, to predict there might be an electromechanic transition. It doesn't seem to me that you have any particular allegiance to spectroscopy to say, here we have two levels, but there's not to our knowledge... We do have electromagnetic action, so let us consider whether there is an electromagnetic condition. I'm sorry, I got that wrong when you flashed this on the screen. I thought this was empirical. No, first of all this was found, then the model was set up, then this was found, then these were found. Sorry, they were found or were predicted? I'm sorry, I missed that point. It was in fact prediction.

37:30 ... really well, and what is going to happen to help them to really do this work, I mean. The thing that disturbs me is, I don't know if you know, Terry, but I'm interested in the idea, that you would probably make do with many purposes, and you know, if you were making do with it, there's a lot of evidence that you think, oh, really, this is rubbish. You see, I wonder if that's possible in your thesis, yes. You see, this is certainly close to your mirror, that here there was a motive for ideological reasons, part of the confirmation of this was that there were five levels, then two quietly dropped, and what I don't quite know is how strong your view is, I'm suggesting that the moment somebody likes to, in theory, again, that... How serious are you? Are you really suggesting that experimental reports of the kind, that the K-level is a doublet, is sociologically dependent on the number of people subscribed to the C-level that predicts this? Strongly dependent, but you still recognize some other criterion in judging the value of this.

40:00 The K-level is maybe published more under certain sociological conditions than others. That you say strongly seems to suggest to me that there is some other way of criticizing that dialogue. I'd like to be a mathematical statistician and experiment a little bit. Right. But on the other hand, we are here talking about a case where it's not meaningless, but a real issue. Are there five states or are there three states? This is not a meaningless question. And that is why I say all this cool... Inconvenient ability can be forgotten about because you have very kindly allowed the discussion of are there three or are there five. So your theory is, in a sense, stronger, if I now follow. Namely, it is, amongst other things, political whether there are five or levels between those. Is the Prime Minister sufficiently persuaded that there are five? No, I mean, no, it's not. We don't see. No, no, no, I see the lines. I get very nice lines. I sometimes get something much better. Let us think of the very nice atomic lines, the very sharp atomic lines. I'm saying that two of these will disappear in the light of some political development. Here was Balmer with his wonderful lines, you see, and then even the Marxists, and the three of them are done.

42:30 Didn't he say that... I mean, you're not... I mean, I'm being absurd. Actually, at one moment, you look at this spectrum, and there's a change of government in Russia. I mean, let's say you've got a spectrum. Yes, but maybe that's... And at the same moment, that spectrum cannot be mastered.