这是我的一篇旧文，刚在科学网又看到相关讨论，所以把我这篇文章在珍珠湾存档 九驳民科c_y_lo 已有 1547 次阅读 2012-5-31 14:34 | 个人分类: 物理 | 系统分类: 观点评述 | 关键词:民科 推荐到群组 英文版： EXPOSE MINKE C_Y_LO A recent article commemorated C.N. Yang's great discovery of the Yang-Mills gauge theory . However, a netizen named c_y_lo vehemently fired back. C_y_lo, who normally assaults Einstein's General Theory of Relativity on some Chinese message board, declares that C.N. Yang is "at most a foot note " in the history of sciences and the Yang-Mills theory is simply wrong. Foaming at his mouth, c_y_Lo writes ：“ Pauli ... criticized this gauge theory as useless because of no mass is involved with Fermions . ” Apparently, c_y_lo did not understand Pauli's critical question posed to Yang. The question was not concerning the masses of the fermions, but those of the gauge bosons. Anyone with rudimentary education in physics can see that the Lagrangian in Yang's paper consists of a Dirac field with mass m and the gauage field B. See, Yang's paper, at http://www.thphys.uni-heidelberg.de/~maniatis/LectureAdv/yang-mills.pdf Thus, Yang-Mills is a theory of massive fermions. This is plainly obvious, because Yang and Mills were looking at the isospin symmetry of proton-neutron at the time. Pauli's question to Yang was: "What is the mass of this field B?" Pauli was asking about mass or the absence of it of the bosonic force field B, not the mass m of the fermion field. When Yang first presented the Yang-Mills theory to a group of physicists, including Pauli, the latter repeatedly asked Yang the same question, and Yang had to stop the presentation at one point. Many years later, C. N. Yang posed a hypothetical: "What if Pauli lived till the 1960s or 1970s?" Since then, the Yang-Mills theory has become the foundation of modern physics and is still an active area of research. Gauge invariance is now the fundamental principle underlying the Standard Model. That old episode with Pauli proved the true genius of Yang. There is little dispute that Yang's contribution to human understanding of nature is at a fundamental level unsurpassed by anyone. It is natural that lesser minds could not and cannot understand the greater ones. Quantum Chromodynamics ("QCD") is a straight application of Yang-Mills SU(3)_c gauge theory. QCD is an exact Yang-Mills theory with massless gluons as the gauge bosons. Despite this common knowledge, c_y_lo states: " Since gluon interacts with Quarks which have masses. Therefore, gauge symmetry must be broken, and this is verified by experiments. The 2008 Nobel Prized for Physics is given to such verification. " C_y_lo's misguided statement shows his cluelessness. There is no flavor gauge symmetry. The QCD gauge symmetry is in the color space of each quark flavor. The 2008 Nobel Prize was awarded for the discovery of a new quark flavor, which has to do with weak interactions. In other words, c_y_lo could not even understand what the Nobel Prize was about. Pseudo-scientists(*) like C-y-Lo are usually harmless, as society rarely pays any attention to their frivolous ideas. Nevertheless, with the advent of the internet, many gullible people on the web may be attracted to such fakers, and their unfounded attacks on established sciences may weaken the foundation of our civilization. In view of the new situation, once the C-y-Lo types crossed their line and meddle with true sciences, they must be exposed and discredited, so as to maintain the dignity and reputation of the sciences on the internet and beyond. *The Chinese for such people is "minke". Read more: 继续涮民科:Expose "Minke" C_Y_Lo - 岳东晓的日志 - 贝壳村 中文版 最近我写了一篇题为《 杨振宁的规范场理论是人类文明的一个里程碑》的文章，主要是介绍了杨振宁 1954 年的那篇论文（ http://www.thphys.uni-heidelberg.de/~maniatis/LectureAdv/yang-mills.pdf ），以及由此所开创的 YANG-MILLS 规范场理论在弱相互作用和强相互作用理论的发展与运用，从历史角度总结了杨的伟大贡献。 一位名为 c_y_lo 的却回应到：“ An article based on ignorant!... after 500 years, Yang is position in the history of sciences is at most a foot note!" 先不说他的 broken English ，其断言非常的狂妄。然而，接下来他的说法却露出马脚。 c_y_lo 写道：“ Pauli did it earlier than Yang, Mills, Shaw; and criticized this gauge theory as useless because of no mass is involved with Fermions. Currently a physical gauge theory is not gauge invariant. ”（注一） 以上所引用的陈述说明三点（ 1 ） c_y_lo 根本看不懂杨振宁的论文； :(2) c_y_lo 根本不懂 PAULI 提出的质量问题；（ 3 ） c_y_lo 没有基本逻辑。论证如下。 （ 1 ）在上述杨的论文中的方程 11 里面有 gamma_u ，那叫 Dirac 矩阵，所以这是描述自旋 1/2 的 fermion ，那个 m 就是 fermion 的质量。可见， c_y_lo说杨理论中 FERMION 没有质量纯属一窍不通。众所周知，在现有的理论中费米子（如电子、夸克）等的质量是自由参数，须由实验确定，而不是来自理论。 （ 2 ） PAULI 提出的质量问题是指传递作用力的规范波色子的质量，而不是费米子的质量。在 YANG-MILLS 方程中规范场不能有质量项，这样的项破坏规范不变性。 （ 3 ）众所周知，在弱电理论中，通过对称自发破缺机制，使弱作用的规范粒子获得了质量（也就与实验得到了吻合）；具体说 SU(2)xU(1) 的 YANG-MILLS 规范场加上自发对称破缺构成了弱电理论。然而，弱电理论需要对称破缺机制不等于所有 YANG-MILLS 的场都需要破缺。具体而言，强相互作用的 QCD （量子色动力学）就是一个精确的 YANG-MILLS 规范场，其规范粒子 gluon 质量为 0 ，不存在规范对称的破缺。 c_y_lo 不但不能理解本博的耐心解释，而且继续妄言到： "The gauge symmetry is broken. This is necessary because fermions have different masses." “ It is well known that QCD is not gauge invariant. ” 这显然是愚蠢的。规范不变性与费米子的质量没有关系。众所周知， QCD 是严格的 Yang-Mills 规范场 . 破缺的是 chiral symmetry 。为什么 c_y_lo 会这么认为“ QCD is not gauge invariant ”？ c_y_lo 写道：“ Since gluon interacts with Quarks which have masses. Therefore, gauge symmetry must be broken, and this is verified by experiments. The 2008 Nobel Prized for Physics is given to such verification. ” 首先，所谓因为费米子（如夸克）有质量，所以规范对称必须破缺完全是基本概念错误。如上所述，费米子质量项在 YANG-MILLS 方程中是固有的一项。那不过是普通的、有质量的 DIRAC 场，加上规范场部分。 QCD 是一个精确的 YANG-MILLS 理论，这中间的 C ，代表颜色。这个颜色与所谓的“味道”是两个完全不同的概念。味道指不同质量的夸克（如上夸克、下夸克等等六种）。在 QCD 的拉格朗日中，对 n 的求和就是对味道的求和 ,m_n 是不同味夸克的质量， n=1 到 6 。 夸克味道之间根本不存在规范对称性，根本不存在“味力”。 每种味道的夸克都有三种颜色， QCD 规范对称性是在每种味道夸克的颜色空间，颜色空间的规范场产生 QCD 中的色力。 2008 年的诺贝尔奖，奖励的是发现了新的夸克味道，其理论基础是关于夸克的弱作用，导致不同味道夸克的混合。 可见，此 c_y_lo 连诺贝尔奖内容是什么都一窍不通，更不用提规范场概念，却狂妄地对杨振宁这样的巨人指手画脚，完全是民科（ 注二） 。 民科的伪科学对社会是有害的。科学来不得虚假，批驳民科是维护科学的尊严。 注一：传说 PAULI 通过一个六维的 KK 理论（ KK 理论为 5 维）得出了类似的方程。把空间维数增加可以得出很多新理论。然而， 5 维 KK 理论本身就是一个死胡同。目前没有任何高维理论得出任何真正的物理。何况 PAULI 的所谓六维理论不过是几封信里提到，不足为信。 注二：根据网上的定义：【 《 表示民间靠兴趣自己研发，大多背离科学规律，挑战公认的经典，比如质疑相对论，进化论等，并不懈的与公理斗争，略带贬义。】
标签: 杨振宁
