美在科学创造中"孤独"绽放——纪念钱德拉塞卡诞辰100周年

美籍印度天体物理学家萨婆罗门扬*钱德拉塞卡(S.Chandrasekhar,1910～1995) "因为对恒星结构和演化过程的研究,特别是因为对白矮星的结构和极限质量的精确预言"而荣获1983年度诺贝尔物理学奖.作为20世纪最杰出的科学家之一,钱德拉塞卡以其在天体物理学、物理学和应用数学等领域广博的贡献闻名于世.在其充满创造传奇的一生中,钱德拉塞卡不仅以创造性的科学贡献充实了人类的知识宝库,还将对美的追求融入科学研究之中,形成了独特的美学风格,成为启迪人类思想的宝贵精神财富.2010年恰逢钱德拉塞卡诞辰100周年、逝世15周年,谨以此文纪念这位伟大的物理学家.     

钱德拉塞卡和白矮星

1983年,73岁的钱德拉塞卡（Chandrasekhar）获得当年的诺贝尔物理学奖。得奖主要原因是他在恒星结构和演化领域所做的贡献,即对白矮星质量上限的研究。这部分工作,是他本人在20世纪30年代完成的,距获奖时隔50年。当时媒体称此为钱德拉塞卡“迟来的春天”。21世纪的今天,当我们再度回顾这段历史,深感带给人们的启发还是相当深刻的。     

钱德拉塞卡（Chandrasekhar，Subrahmanyan，1910-1995）印度-美国天文学家（Astronomer，India-America）

钱德拉塞卡在印度马德拉斯大学受教育，1930年毕业。1933年他在剑桥大学狄拉克的指导下获得哲学博士学位。1936年到美国，在芝加哥大学任教，并在耶基斯天文台工作。钱德拉塞卡主要对白矮星的结构感兴趣，白矮星的异常性质是亚当斯首先发现的。在这些恒星中，组成星体的大多数原子已经碎成一团团亚原子粒子——等离子体，而整个星体已经压缩到这种程度，使它的总密度有普通物质的千万倍（退体物质）。     

钱德拉塞卡对二十世纪科学的贡献

两千多年来,天文学家一直认为宇宙是完美而宁静的,19岁的Chandrasekha在前往英格兰读研究生途中的一个计算结果敲响了完美宁静宇宙观终结的钟声. 2010年12月出版的Physics Today杂志上,刊登了Dyson撰写的Chandrasekha(钱德拉塞卡)对二十世纪科学的贡献一文.该文基于他在2010年10月16日芝加哥大学举行的Chandrasekhar百年诞辰庆典时的演讲稿,详细地介绍了Chandrasekhar的科学生涯以及对二十世纪科学的杰出贡献.     

晕核及弱束缚核的近垒熔合

阐述了晕核近垒熔合反应研究的意义;叙述了理论上关于晕核破裂与入射道相对运动的耦合使熔合截面增强还是阻禁了晕核熔合两种相反观点的争论,以及晕核熔合反应实验研究的现状;探讨了用弱束缚核代替晕核进行实验研究以求对理论上的争论作出判断的构想．     

厄米多项式的定义及其他

分析了关于厄米多项式的争论.介绍了厄米多项式的两种定义.     

关于运动量度的历史辩争——兼谈几位科学家的贡献

历史上，关于机械运动的量度问题曾引起半个多世纪的争论，在这场关于运动量度的历史辩争中，涌现出一大批自然科学家，他们对后来的动量守恒和能量守恒定律都做出了不可磨灭的贡献，文中简要介绍了运动量度的溯源和争论，同时兼谈科学家们对运动量度的相关贡献.     

光的波动说与微粒说之争及其启示

本文介绍了波动说和微粒说的提出及争论,得到了关于科学发展和人类进步的启示．     

统计物理历史上的宏观不可逆性与微观可逆性之争

牛顿力学的时间可逆性与宏观热力学过程不可逆性的矛盾,很长时间以来一直是物理学和哲学中争论最多的问题之一．本文通过玻尔兹曼引入的H定理所引起的不可逆性之争,回顾了历史上关于这一问题的争论,并讨论了最近几十年关于这一问题研究的历史进展．在现代遍历性理论和混沌动力学的框架下,微观可逆与宏观不可逆之间的矛盾得到了很好的回答,并得到了很好的统一和解决.     

必须重视对量子力学的哥本哈根解释的批判

量子力学诞生至今已有五十年了,五十年来,量子力学作为突破经典物理学的一次巨大革新,在研究光谱学、固体物理、原子结构、原子核结构直至基本粒子等广泛的领域内取得了辉煌的成就.现在,量子力学和相对论一起,构成了现代物理学的两块基石,在这两个领域中进行探索和研究,对突破和发展现代物理学理论具有重要的意义. 科学上重大问题的出现,总会引起各种争论.五十年来围绕着量子力学解释问题上的争论一直没有停止过,学派之多,争论之激烈,是历史上空前的.这就说明,自然科学每前进一步都是要花费力气的,人类要在微观世界取得自由不是一件轻而易举…     

Comment on “the rastall model and Stapp's proof of nonlocality”

It is shown that the argument set forth as being my argument is fundamentally different from my argument.1. This work was supported by the Director, Office of Energy Research, Office of High Energy and Nuclear Physics, Division of High Energy Physics of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC03-76SF00098.     

对称化光学系统对像散复宗量厄米-高斯光束的变换

 使用二阶矩和广义惠更斯 菲涅尔衍射积分方法研究了用于实宗量厄米高斯光束对称化的光学系统对复宗量厄米-高斯光束的变换。研究结果表明：复宗量厄米-高斯光束经过该光学系统后，只能在出射面上实现在二阶矩定义下的对称化，但光斑不具有旋转对称性。因此，这套用于实宗量光束对称化的光学系统对复宗量光束并不适用。     

Comments on “determinism,realism, and Stapp's 1985 proof of nonlocality”

An earlier argument by the author, that Stapp's 1985 proof of quantum locality contains an implicit element of realism, is elaborated. Refuted thereby is Clifton's criticism that the author's argument was based on a misinterpretation of counterfactual analysis.     

Distinguishing Initial State-Vectors from Each Other in Histories Formulations and the PBR Argument

Following the argument of Pusey et al. (in Nature Phys. 8:476, 2012), new interest has been raised on whether one can interpret state-vectors (pure states) in a statistical way (ψ-epistemic theories), or if each one of them corresponds to a different ontological entity. Each interpretation of quantum theory assumes different ontology and one could ask if the PBR argument carries over. Here we examine this question for histories formulations in general with particular attention to the co-event formulation. State-vectors appear as the initial state that enters into the quantum measure. While the PBR argument goes through up to a point, the failure to meet some of the assumptions they made does not allow one to reach their conclusion. However, the author believes that the “statistical interpretation” is still impossible for co-events even if this is not proven by the PBR argument.     

Poissonian and non-Poissonian Voronoi diagrams with application to the aggregation of molecules

The distributions that regulate the spatial domains of the Poissonian Voronoi diagrams are discussed adopting the sum of gamma variate of argument two. The distributions that arise from the product and quotient of two gamma variates of argument two are also derived. Three examples of non-Poissonian seeds for the Voronoi Diagrams are discussed. The developed algorithm allows the simulation of an aggregation of methanol and water.     

Solomon’s Argument on Hidden Variables in Quantum Theory

J. Solomon [Journal de Physique 4, 34 (1933)] produced an argument of great generality claiming to demonstrate the impossibility of hidden variables in quantum theory, an argument which M. Jammer [The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics(Wiley, New York, 1974)] said raised a number of questions. For the first time, this argument is discussed, a simple hidden variable model violating the argument is analysed in detail, and the error in the proof is located.     

Not All Structure and Dynamics Are Equal

The hard problem of consciousness has been a perennially vexing issue for the study of consciousness, particularly in giving a scientific and naturalized account of phenomenal experience. At the heart of the hard problem is an often-overlooked argument, which is at the core of the hard problem, and that is the structure and dynamics (S&D) argument. In this essay, I will argue that we have good reason to suspect that the S&D argument given by David Chalmers rests on a limited conception of S&D properties, what in this essay I’m calling extrinsic structure and dynamics. I argue that if we take recent insights from the complexity sciences and from recent developments in Integrated Information Theory (IIT) of Consciousness, that we get a more nuanced picture of S&D, specifically, a class of properties I’m calling intrinsic structure and dynamics. This I think opens the door to a broader class of properties with which we might naturally and scientifically explain phenomenal experience, as well as the relationship between syntactic, semantic, and intrinsic notions of information. I argue that Chalmers’ characterization of structure and dynamics in his S&D argument paints them with too broad a brush and fails to account for important nuances, especially when considering accounting for a system’s intrinsic properties. Ultimately, my hope is to vindicate a certain species of explanation from the S&D argument, and by extension dissolve the hard problem of consciousness at its core, by showing that not all structure and dynamics are equal.     

Quantum Counterfactuals and Locality

Stapp’s counterfactual argument for quantum nonlocality based upon a Hardy entangled state is shown to be flawed. While he has correctly analyzed a particular framework using the method of consistent histories, there are alternative frameworks which do not support his argument. The framework dependence of quantum counterfactual arguments, with analogs in classical counterfactuals, vitiates the claim that nonlocal (superluminal) influences exist in the quantum world. Instead it shows that counterfactual arguments are of limited use for analyzing these questions.     

A formal statement of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen argument

Assumptions of the original Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen argument are formally stated as axioms and nonlogical rules of inference. Then the argument is formally stated, making explicit the assumptions, logical structure, and conclusions involved. In turn several interpretative disputes are resolved. One frequent objection to the argument and a prevalent response to that objection as well are shown to be misguided.