"The Nobel Prize in Physics 1957 was awarded jointly to Chen Ning Yang and Tsung-Dao (T.D.) Lee "for their penetrating investigation of the so-called parity laws which has led to important discoveries regarding the elementary particles""
正是。雖然文章是按字母順序Lee and Yang,但諾獎網站上明確寫的是Yang and Lee。這個排名不是獲獎者可以決定的,而是評獎委員會綜合考慮發現經過和獲獎人貢獻決定的。楊出道早,是當時研究Tau-Theta之謎年輕一代的領軍人物,從1956年4月羅切斯特會議的簡報就可以看出來。提出把結果推廣到整個弱相互作用,而不去動其他三大相互作用,也是楊的精準判斷。不推廣則工作的影響遠不足以拿諾獎,但如果推廣過頭,就錯了。這裏楊先生拿捏得恰到好處。
The absence of Communist officials from his funeral remains a crown of laurels for 楊振寧, testifying to his integrity and dedication to China, the country, but not to the ruling regime, and making him more venerable.
Nearly one hundred ninety physicists participated in the Sixth Annual Rochester Conference on April 3th–7th, 1956. One of its main topics was the rapidly growing field of the new elementary particles. The session on“Theoretical Interpretation of New Particles” was chaired by Oppenheimer...The introductory talk was delivered by Yang who gave a summary of experiments and several propositions to explain the tau–theta puzzle.
“It was during that discussion that the idea of parity nonconservation was first seriously discussed in large audience. Richard Feynman, who was a participant, gave a lively recollection of the event [2]: “I was sharing a room with a guy named Martin Block, an experimenter. And one evening he said to me, ‘Why are you guys so insistent on this parity rule? Maybe the tau and theta are the same particle. What would be the consequences if the parity rule were wrong?’
‘So the next day at the meeting . . . I got up and said, ‘I’m asking this question for Martin Block: What would be the consequences if the parity rule was wrong?’Lee, of Lee and Yang, answered something complicated, and as usual I didn‘t understand very well.
At the end of the meeting Block asked me what he said, and I said I did not know, but as far as I could tell, it was still open — there was still a possibility. I didn’t think it was likely, but I thought it was possible . . . ”.
網上還可以查到這次會議最後一天的總結發言【3】:
“The last day of the conference was devoted to participants sharing their conclusions on the θ-τ puzzle. Frank Yang gave an introductory review. After several talks had been given, Robert Oppenheimer, the chairman of the session, was ready to close the session when several prominent physicists chose to make statements. Murray Gell Mann (蓋爾曼)presented a list of approaches to the problem which he had considered, but without designating his choice. Richard Feynman (費曼)brought up Block's suggestion in the form of the θ and τ mesons being the same particle but with no definite parity. Frank Yang (即楊振寧)told the meeting that he had looked into several aspects of the nonconservation of parity without reaching a conclusion.”
也就是說,質疑宇稱守恒,恐怕是這個會議上集體討論使與會者受到的啟發,產生這一想法的人,絕對不止一個。蓋爾曼、費曼和楊振寧這幾位大牛,以及實驗物理學家Martin Block,都考慮到了不守恒的可能性;楊還特別提到他從幾個不同角度審視了宇稱不守恒,但尚未得出結論。不但如此,李先生還直接從費曼替Block提的問題中獲得了啟發,"What would be the consequences if the parity rule was wrong?",不可能不引起他更深入的思考。而李先生的回憶,也說宇稱不守恒的想法產生於56年4月,印證了他在羅切斯特會議上受到的影響。
【1】Andrzej K. Wróblewski,”THE DOWNFALL OF PARITY — THE REVOLUTION
THAT HAPPENED FIFTY YEARS AGO", ACTA PHYSICA POLONICA B, 39, page 254 (2008)
【2】R.P. Feynman, Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman! The Adventures of a
Curious Character as told to Ralph Leighton, p. 247–248, W.W. Norton &
Company, New York–London 1985.
Instead, "中國政府,官員,沒有一個參加" 彰顯 the fact that 楊振寧先生 had never fawned on nor bowed to the communist regime. This in turn 彰顯 that he went to China for the purpose of serving the country, instead of the regime or his own interests. He must have expressed some opinions or even criticisms that antagonized 習近平 himself, whose attitude determined that 中國政府,官員,沒有一個參加.
誠信 發表評論於
Has 楊振寧 ever expressed adverse opinion on 氣功?
Does anybody know?
誠信 發表評論於
Very funny!
It is their resentments of Chinses communist regime that prompt the stupid yellow Trump loyalists to worship Trump.
Ironically, when they strive to disparage 楊振寧, they rely on the behaviors of Chinses communist regime to justify and support their argument.
So stupid, to my nausea.
誠信 發表評論於
中國政府,官員,沒有一個參加,彰顯楊 is truly venerable, instead.
誠信 發表評論於
"在楊的遺體告別那天,中國政府,官員,沒有一個參加的,彰顯楊就是一個普通老人,民間人士。"
Terribly wrong, overly stupid.
Instead, "中國政府,官員,沒有一個參加" 彰顯 the fact that 楊振寧先生 had never fawned on nor bowed to the communist regime. This in turn 彰顯 that he went to China for the purpose of serving the country, instead of the regime or his own interests. He must have expressed some opinions or even criticisms that antagonized 習近平 himself, whose attitude determined that 中國政府,官員,沒有一個參加.
Can anybody teach me, why fanatic Trump loyalists in Wenxuecity insanely besiege 楊振寧 so fiercely?
Listen carefully, his marriage with a young wife and his altercations with 李政道 remain neither illegal nor immoral. At most, he merely is not a good model of virtues.
In stark contrast, Trump has perpetrated many illegal crimes and countless extremely immoral misconducts. He has been convicted of many felonies. Why do the fanatic yellow Trump loyalists here still insanely love and worship him, but constantly vilify 楊振寧 instead?