ChatGPT can tell you things about theoretical physics from reading what theoretical physicist have been writing, which a living theoretical physicist will not tell you unless you press hard.
For example, chatGPT will tell you that the Standard Model SM of particle physics describing the ingredients of atomic nuclei (protons and neutrons), does not directly describe the structure, dynamics or properties of nuclei, not even the simplest nucleus of 2H (deuterium) formed by one proton interacting with one neutron.
In particular, SM does not directly describe the (nuclear) force keeping 2H together, except as some form of residual force as a leftover of the strong force of SM supposed to hold the quarks forming a proton together, with the residual force given the role to overpower the Coulomb force of classical electro-magnetics (even if zero between proton and neutron).
So SM can describe a single proton and a single neutron, but not really their interaction forming 2H. Yet SM is by physicists presented as "immensely successful" as the greatest achievement of science all categories. The success is demonstrated in a prediction of the "anomalous magnetic moment of the electron" agreeing with measurement to 13 decimal places. The measurement comes from using a Penning trap to confine a single electron into observation over long timescales. The proclaimed very high precision in this experiment is used as heavy evidence that SM is correct. Physicists agree that SM has many shortcomings, which cannot be compensated by increasing the precision from 13 to 15 decimal places.
RealNucleus offers an alternative to SM showing stability/existence of nuclei under Coulomb forces, thus without any leftover of some strong force. You can test yourself what chatGPT has to say about such a possibility.
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar