FrediFizzx wrote:thray wrote:Nope. Those are field properties.
So what? Matter is quantum fields.
I don't know what that means.
A field is a continuum of influences, " ... a function of the coordinates and time". That's what I like about Joy's framework -- it speaks directly to the analytical nature of limit and function. It isn't matter that causes the "click" of detection; it's the limit of the function, which is always local.
You seem to be abandoning that approach in favor of interacting discrete quantities (quantum mechanics) without a function, without a limit, without a measure space, and which begs nonlocality. Einstein: " ... an attempt to breathe in empty space."
This is not directed at you, Fred -- I read or heard somewhere, of a professor who was confronted with a student's question of why, if an atom is mostly empty space, one's head doesn't just pass through a steel girder instead of bumping against it. The professor resisted the temptation to answer, "Because your head is even emptier than the steel beam" yet it's the right answer. Matter (mass) density isn't a property of matter -- what keeps you from being sucked to the center of the Earth -- it's a property of the spacetime field at the boundary of interaction. ("All physics is local.")
When you say matter is quantum fields, you obviate that the main characteristic of matter is oscillation -- that's the only way we know that matter exists. Not by a theoretically nonlocal quantum field. An oscillation that displaces spacetime locally, and does not disturb global evolution, is time-dilated in proportion to the kinetic momentum.
When we come up against Planck's constant as a limit of action, we give up time dilation (normalize it). There really isn't a good physical reason for the constant not to go to zero. I'm happy to take Einstein's view: " ... think of a quantum as a singularity, surrounded by a large vector field".