Quantum Theory

A new super symmetry model and a new basis of understanding. and answering a math question. link removed -Ochitawa Debwewin ⊗ωχτα

BTW: I heard a few months ago that scientists were able to use quantum entanglement to transport information between two crystals. Is this confirmed, and does it disprove the theory that entanglement can't be used to replace the existing internet infrastructure?

I saw a few videos on quantium levatation and its fasinating! using a superconductor with liquid nitrogen and a super magnet can make something stay in the air in one spot and you and move the object and it stays the same position once you move it. i saw a video where the japanese were using it as transportation. floating cars here we come! I was hoping someone could explain how it works

There are theories that we know are wrong, but we use them because they are good enough in certain (often most) circumstances and are easier to use. We know that GR is less wrong than Newtonian Mechanics, for instance, but we use Newtonian in most cases because the precision increase of going to GR is outweighed by the difficulty cost of going to GR in most cases. On the smaller scale, we have QM vs QFT. They're both attempts to describe the nature of the fundamental constituents of matter and the ways in which they interact, but the latter is consistent with SR and and the former is not. Specifically, in single particle QM, there's a non-zero probability that a p…

If you have an electron and an observer,if the observer accelerates does the electron emit photon?

I admit first-off I have absolutely no expertise in this area, this question may be utterly absurd, but: As I understand things, the 3 fundamental forces that conform to quantum theory have an absolute lower limit, based somehow on the Planck constants; nothing can have a lower energy than the Planck limit, no particle can have a dimension smaller than the Planck length, etc. But why does gravity have to have a lowest possible limit, a quantizeable value. Again, as I understand things, gravity acts by bending space-time, it's thought of as being as being a "geometrical" phenomenon. Does a geometrical function, a geometrical progression that has a limit of zero, ever actu…

I question the conclusion gleaned from the double slit experiment that an electron manifests from a wave like potentia into a real particle. Not that I'm arrogant enough to think I'm right, I question it so that someone may elucidate for me. What is to rule out the possibility that the electron is always a particle which produces a wave like effect because it goes through some kind of deflection (the mechanism of which is currently unknown) which causes it to shoot off at an angle between slit and screen. Perhaps the angle is related to some quantum property of the electron, for instance its momentum. The fact that the momentum can exist in only discrete amounts means…

Tbh i dont believe in paralle universes

Hey guys, I've recently become more interested in science (The double slit experiment cartoon on youtube completely blew my mind) and am starting to wish i paid more attention to it in school instead of screwing around. Does anyone have any books\documentaries\websites they'd recommend to someone with very little prior knowledge?

It seems that radio wavelength experiments could shed some light on answering this question that I would like to understand. Consider the following experiment. A circular coil antenna, preferably made of high resistivity material so as to immediately quench the electrical current. A power supply produces DC current through the wire, thus forming a magnetic field that extends outside the coil. The longer the current is held, the farther out the field stabilizes. Then, suddenly the current is removed from the coil. This produces a stream of photons that travel inward toward the center of the coil antenna. The photons point of origin are not from the coil. They are comi…

Gravity is a by-product of mass curving space-time, and mass is the by-product of particles interacting with the HIggs field. My question is could there be a correlation between the Higgs field and gravity?

Hello. New here: Sorry if this has been asked before, but can someone who understands physics please clear up my understanding of the implications of quantum mechanics. Which of the following four statements is false, if any, and why? 1. The behaviour of quantum systems is elegantly described by Schrödinger’s equation, which describes a wave (or wave ‘function’ – not quite sure of the difference). 2. When measured (e.g. in the famous double-slit experiment) quantum systems display or ‘collapse’ into particle-like behaviour. 3. It would seem that quantum systems exist in some kind of state that the mind simply cannot picture; in the same way it can picture, say, a …

While studying quantum mechanics from standard textbooks I always felt some conceptual gap that was never mentioned or explained. In what follow I tried to formulate my question, please be patient with me. For a quantum particle in an infinite potential well the stationary states are labelled by the quantum number [latex]n[/latex] which labels the eigenenergies. An eigenenergy, that corresponds to a stationary state, does not change with time, hence is a conserved quantity. For a spinless electron in Coulomb potential, to model the hydrogen atom, again we have the same story, the stationary states are labeled by the quantum numbers [latex]n[/latex], [latex]l[/late…

I'm trying to derive (14.25) in B&J QFT. This is [latex]U(\epsilon)A^\mu(x)U^{-1}(\epsilon) = A^\mu(x') - \epsilon^{\mu\nu}A_\nu(x') + \frac{\partial \lambda(x',\epsilon)}{\partial x'_\mu}[/latex], where [latex]\lambda(x',\epsilon)[/latex] is an operator gauge function. This is all being done in the radiation gauge, i.e. [latex]A_0 = 0[/latex] and [latex]\partial_i A^i=0[/latex], with [latex]i \in {1,2,3}[/latex]. [latex]\epsilon[/latex] is an infinitesimal parameter of a Lorentz transformation [latex]\Lambda[/latex]. Under this transformation, [latex]A^\mu(x) \rightarrow A'^\mu(x')=U(\epsilon)A^\mu(x)U^{-1}(\epsilon)[/latex]. The unitary operator [latex]…

I have been told that for a ground state harmonic oscillator, if a lowering operator is placed on the extreme right no matter what operators follow the expectation value will be zero. I don't fully understand this. Is this because the right operator acts first and lowering the ground state will result in zero, once this is happened it cannot be raised by a raising operator? Can somebody be so kind as to post maths on this if possible. On a further note I am completely clueless as to why unequal numbers of raising and lowering operators equate a ground state harmonic oscillator to a zero expectation value.

I figure that at large enough distances, the potential field of an ion is just the Coulomb potential for its net charge. But what happens at scales comparable to the ion's Bohr radius? Could there be, for example, some sort of screening effect from the electron shell that changes the potential? (depending on what the test charge is, like if you dropped a single electron near an ion) I'm a bit rusty on quantum mechanics, but I do remember that the math for atoms that aren't hydrogen gets complicated. Is there a known good way to approximate this potential? Or is my best bet to go download some quantum chemistry software?

I'm working through Sakurai's Modern Quantum Mechanics and in the section on Permutation Symmetry and Young Tableaux, he mentions that a tableau constructed of [latex]\square = \boxed{1},\boxed{2},\boxed{3}[/latex] corresponds to a irrep of [latex]SU(3)[/latex], but if each box is instead a [latex]j=1[/latex] object, a tableau is not a irrep of the rotation group. He then goes on to discuss this in detail, although I cannot follow his argument other than taking a guess that the decomposition of the mixed symmetry tableau leads to some incompatibilities in representing the rotation group. Can anyone clear up why a tableau composed of a [latex]\square = \boxed{1}…

Hi guys...... Can anyone explain what black body radiation is...and how was max plank able to explain it in terms of e=hv..??? Plz explain in simple words... Thank you

Can u guys explain me wat a uv catastrophe is....and what is its relation with max plank's quantum theory

If photons are pure energy, if they collide won't they just double their energy (i.e. increase in light intensity) rather than cancel each other out because they have no mass? ~EE

Could Electrons (or other fundamental particles) evaporate by high temperature like stars in the universe?

Yep. If actions and reactions were somehow instantaneous it would require an infinite amount of energy - which is clearly ludicrous. An infinite amount of energy on the simple premise that such an instant action or reaction would require an infinite field of (say) gravity that extends throughout the universe to move all at once. As said, to move such an boundless field all as one entity would clearly require the ludicrous situation of an infinite amount of energy. From what I understand this was first realised by James Clark Maxwell, and provided the mathematics of propagation. Which (my maths is nowhere good enough) I understand amounts to the speed of a massless par…

In a recent blog (Here's that cat again), Swansont gave a link to a visualization of the double slit experiment. He pointed out that "the depiction of electrons in classical trajectories detracts from" the depiction. I agree. The best depiction I have seen is in the link below (Quantum Wave Interference): http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulation/quantum-wave-interference It shows the electron (or photon or atom, etc.) as a wave (wave function) passing through both slits, producing two waves which interfere with each other, and then the detection of a single particle on the detector screen. Each time the simulation is run, the single particle shows up at another …

I am in my final year of physics (hoping to get into a theoretical physics masters). I have been going though quantum mechanics and I haven't seen an explanation as to why there is eigenfunctions in quantum mechanics. From what I understand an eigenfunction is a function that stays the same once it's be derived or integrated. The eigenvalue is a constant that comes from this process. Last year I used eigenvalues to find points of equilibrium. This was a fairly easy concept to grasp. In quantum mechanics is the use of eigenfunctions fundamental like for instance quantisation? Or is it mathematically useful like using e for a general solution to a second order different…

In the double slit experiment, it is said scientists wanted to observe which slit a singularly fired photon went through once they discovered even this produces an interference pattern. On an atomic level of description, how exactly do they observe a singular photon? Ie what is used to extract information about the photons position at the slit without stopping the photon altogether? And what physical effect does this have on the photon ie does it affect its momentum/energy? To screen used to see the interference pattern actually absorbs the photon and essentially destroys it, so that can't be used to watch the photon pass through a given slit. Same question for …