Do atoms really exist? Surely an atom is just a thing that a collection of electrons and quarks do

The exact process in which matter is created is something I've never even thought about until now. I'd like to know if the fundamental forces existed exactly when the big bang happened, or about pre-big bang conditions.

how can mirrors be real if our eyes aren't real

>Do atoms really exist?

>how can mirrors be real if our eyes aren't real

What are electrons and quarks made up of then?

Preons

What is without a doubt THE most simple fundamental (or smallest) building block of matter? How does it take form?

Just renormalize my nigglet.

they are a framework to understand the tiny building blocks of matter..nothing more

Not as particles, no. Everything is fields, and fields are not particles.

When are you going to realize that there is no bottom to that rabbit hole?

i.e., what are preons comprised of?

pre-preons

Nope, it's just a social construct.

I have to say I am a bit tired of people running with paradigms associated with models that everyone already knows are incomplete. We know fields don't work well enough for the concept to stick around. Can we just, I don't know, stop insisting on saying wrong things until we come up with something better?

Do strings really exist? Surely a string is just a thing that a collection of ...

Is anything really a part of anything? Who's to say that reality isn't just one big thing that doesn't fit into the part-whole composition our reductive minds so arbitrarily synthesize of it?

actually there are post-pre-preons between preons and pre-preons

makes perfect sense to me... 0 + (-2)(electrons) = -2
0 + (+2)(protons) = 2

Isn't that what's in a refrigerator

Read something about emergence.

Fields are equivalent to particles, just a different way of reasoning and different mathematics involved.
To say fields do not exists is the same as particles do not exist, because at the end, we only perceive the interaction, the force between things. Force is the phenomenological event that we study, everything else is just human interpretation.
In this line of reasoning, yes atoms do exist. When interacting with tiny needle microscopes (AFM), the force profile is spherical around the atom, shaped like a crystal around crystals etc. So yes, atoms are very real, and Schrödinger is very good at predicting the interaction of atoms with their environment.

...

>>scale bar 0.3 um
those aren't atoms idiot.

String theory.

>a collection of electrons and quarks do
and a tree is the collection of splinters. because that's what happen with tree if we collide it with fast moving objects.
particle physics is a joke.

round and round the thread goes

youtube.com/watch?v=gEKSpZPByD0

He's pretty explicit about how fields are likely here to stay.

Sure, any given model is prone to refinement, but if you have multiple independent models derived using different approaches (QM and R) reduce well to a single model (QFT) than it's hugely likely it's at least on the right path. This path is fundamentally based on waves/ fields.

Being fundamentally wrong in its most refined respects is quite the stretch from being incomplete...

>Who's to say that reality isn't just one big thing that doesn't fit into the part-whole composition our reductive minds so arbitrarily synthesize of it?

You just did. Your doing something rather than everything doing everything just did. You seeing one apple instead of all you's seeing all apples (is this getting through?).

The question isn't whether or not "one big thing fits into the part-whole composition" but how?

Do particles correspond with the intersection between dynamic fields?

>Do atoms really exist?
Sort of.

>>ADD more electrons
>>get a NEGATIVE charge
>>TAKE AWAY electrons
>>get a POSITIVE charge

That is Benjamin Franklins fault. He knew something was flowing with electricity, but he got the charge and direction backwards.

Chemists have improved your daily life exponemtially. Most of the materials in what you use everyday were invented by chemists in the past 100 years. So yes atoms are very real. Now what has the physicist-shaman done for you, common man? Fed you lies about "quarks" and "gluons" which they say come in "flavors"? Make no mistake, the falsehoods here are the physicist's religion, not the chemist's science.

Have we ever directly observed atoms or did we simply construct a model and assume that things are structured by a multitude of this model?

see

What exactly are they? Particles?

Nothing exists besides material that is indivisible and is not composed of smaller parts. One could look at only the fundamental particles that constitute the universe and they would be looking at all that exists.

"positive" and "negative" are just labels, like "north" and "south" on magnets.

No, particles are "peaks" in probability waves propagating thru fields.

Particles are subatomic. An atom is too small to see, that goes double for particles.

the milky way is an atom and our sun is an electron

light at a frequency resonating with the density of the air