"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。虽然文章是按字母顺序Lee and Yang,但诺奖网站上明确写的是Yang and Lee。这个排名不是获奖者可以决定的,而是评奖委员会综合考虑发现经过和获奖人贡献决定的。杨出道早,是当时研究Tau-Theta之谜年轻一代的领军人物,从1956年4月罗切斯特会议的简报就可以看出来。提出把结果推广到整个弱相互作用,而不去动其他三大相互作用,也是杨的精准判断。不推广则工作的影响远不足以拿诺奖,但如果推广过头,就错了。这里杨先生拿捏得恰到好处。
The absence of Communist officials from his funeral remains a crown of laurels for 杨振宁, 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 . . . ”.
网上还可以查到这次会议最后一天的总结发言【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 (盖尔曼)presented a list of approaches to the problem which he had considered, but without designating his choice. Richard Feynman (费曼)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 (即杨振宁)told the meeting that he had looked into several aspects of the nonconservation of parity without reaching a conclusion.”
也就是说,质疑宇称守恒,恐怕是这个会议上集体讨论使与会者受到的启发,产生这一想法的人,绝对不止一个。盖尔曼、费曼和杨振宁这几位大牛,以及实验物理学家Martin Block,都考虑到了不守恒的可能性;杨还特别提到他从几个不同角度审视了宇称不守恒,但尚未得出结论。不但如此,李先生还直接从费曼替Block提的问题中获得了启发,"What would be the consequences if the parity rule was wrong?",不可能不引起他更深入的思考。而李先生的回忆,也说宇称不守恒的想法产生于56年4月,印证了他在罗切斯特会议上受到的影响。
【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, "中国政府,官员,没有一个参加" 彰显 the fact that 杨振宁先生 had never fawned on nor bowed to the communist regime. This in turn 彰显 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 习近平 himself, whose attitude determined that 中国政府,官员,没有一个参加.
诚信 发表评论于
Has 杨振宁 ever expressed adverse opinion on 气功?
Does anybody know?
诚信 发表评论于
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 杨振宁, they rely on the behaviors of Chinses communist regime to justify and support their argument.
So stupid, to my nausea.
诚信 发表评论于
中国政府,官员,没有一个参加,彰显杨 is truly venerable, instead.
诚信 发表评论于
"在杨的遗体告别那天,中国政府,官员,没有一个参加的,彰显杨就是一个普通老人,民间人士。"
Terribly wrong, overly stupid.
Instead, "中国政府,官员,没有一个参加" 彰显 the fact that 杨振宁先生 had never fawned on nor bowed to the communist regime. This in turn 彰显 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 习近平 himself, whose attitude determined that 中国政府,官员,没有一个参加.
Can anybody teach me, why fanatic Trump loyalists in Wenxuecity insanely besiege 杨振宁 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 杨振宁 instead?