Quantum Theory

hello everyone, first time posting here, but I need some advice I'm currently in Geo/Trig mathematics and Bio/Chem classes ((sophomore)), but I need some advice. I'm currently able to take a classes level Physics 1 class, and it's a rather large investment of time, so I would like to know. Would it be good to start with Physics 1 (physics a), then move to b and c physics, then start reading quantum physics books and etc, or would it be better for me to just skip traditional physics and go right into qm books. I know basic physics stuff, not a ton of equations but I know a decent amount. Just for added information, I'd love to go into a job that has to do with p…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamilton–Jacobi_equation The "Classical" HJ equation [math]H + \frac{\partial S}{\partial t} = 0[/math] where the action [math]S = \int L dt[/math] gives rise to [math]\Psi = \Psi_0 e^{i \frac{S}{\hbar}}[/math] so the phase of wave-functions, at some particular point, is equal to the time integral, of the action, at that point, from [math]t=-\infty[/math] to the current time ?

Does the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics presage the existence of anti universes where for every matter particle there is a anti particle? Also do these projected universes support inversion of symmetry. eg) My anti self in my anti universe would raise his left hand when i raised my right hand. (Quirky... ) Please provide some insight into this issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_equation#Comparison_with_the_Pauli_theory [math] \left( E - q \Phi \right) \Psi_+ - c \vec{\sigma}\circ\left(\hat{p}-q \vec{A}\right) \Psi_- = m c^2 \Psi_+[/math] [math] - \left( E - q \Phi \right) \Psi_- + c \vec{\sigma}\circ\left(\hat{p}-q \vec{A}\right) \Psi_+ = m c^2 \Psi_-[/math] If no anti-matter exists, i.e. [math]\Psi_- = 0[/math], then matter must exist in a "super-conducting state", to wit [math]\left( \vec{p} - q \vec{A} \right) = 0[/math]. So, oppositely, if matter does not propagate in such a "super-conducting BCS-similar state", then any residual [math]c\vec{\sigma}\circ\left(\hat{p}-q\vec{A}\right)\Psi_+ \ne 0…

Q1: trying to denote spin, w/ subscripts, what prevents the "trifurcation" of photons: [math]\gamma_{+\hbar} \longrightarrow \gamma_{+\hbar} + \gamma_{-\hbar} + \gamma_{+\hbar}[/math] The above hypothetical photon decay could conserve all quantum numbers, as well as spin, and energy + momentum. So, what prevents (presumably?) such processes ? Q2: If photons are spin=1... then why don't electrons, interacting w/ protons in atoms, constantly spin flip, each time they emit or absorb virtual photons ? Q2': If virtual bosons can exist "off mass shell", w/ non-Einstein-equation-compliant combinations of momentum + energy... then can they also exist w/o the c…

Anyone know the best way to fully understand quantum theory (eg. Prerequisites)? I already know some Classical Mechanics, and a bit of calculus, but I still have a hard time with QM. I know it conceptually, but knowing it mathematically is much more interesting.

I mean the usual thing by 'measurement' or 'observation'

Taken from Wikipedia. In quantum mechanics, the uncertainty principle is any of a variety of mathematical inequalities asserting a fundamental limit to the precision with which certain pairs of physical properties of a particle known as complementary variables, such as position x and momentum p, can be known simultaneously. Here is the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle --->Although I am quite familiar with the generalization, I am wondering if. That the uncertainty principle sounds like a mathematical attempt " with no physics involved" that tries to locate 2 positions simultaneously and or harmoniously, while using mome…

I have been reading a bit about this lately and am trying to gain more information on it. I have come across a term called Breitschaft Potential on some website and would appreciate more information on this subject.

Why is 1/2 so important in the QM world??? For instance SI units " mostly uses" bases of 10 below is an image that shows this. A good example is .5c = 149.896229, are the meters 1/2?? Then their is the case about the exponent , how does this also relate to 1/2. Energy of photon : c*h =299.792458*6.626e-34 = 1.9864e-31 c*h =299.792458*6.626e-34 = 1.9864e+31 ??? Could this be 1/2 as well??? AS IN THE BASES OF 10, SUCH LIKE 10/2 = 5? I have seen the n^(n+1) deal but how would this yield 1/2 in the exponential properties of 1/2 making this =1? This is why I assumed this for the energy of the photon: 1.9864e-31= 1 1.9864e+31= -1 I know that may be …

Is my math wrong or is there a giant hole in QM? As far as I can tell, in QM radioactive decay is always treated as individual probabilities for each activation event. The result of such a system would be linear radioactive decay, but we never see that. We always see exponential radioactive decay which requires then that the decay rate be dependant upon population size. I have never seen or heard even a postulate at a system or mechanism in either classical or quantum physics that attempts to explain or account for this discrepancy in any way. Am I missing something? Shouldn't this be listed as one of the great all time physics mysteries?

Can human thoughts be measured?????? If a person remembers their vacation to Hawaii " past" " while at work in New York " present" could this " technically " be termed a measure of human thoughts? Just take the distance from Hawaii And New York And violla there it is! But lets say that this same person remembers " multiple" vacation trips on this very same day at work in New York, then things get rather complex, right?? Could this be another case of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle?? To get more complex, say this person goes home after a long days work and decides to just go to bed and sleep the rest of the evening. Then they dream of this v…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_electrodynamics#Equations_of_motion When you take the variational derivative, of the QED Lagrangian, with respect to the wave function [math]\Psi[/math]... why doesn't the derivative include terms, due to the conjugate transpose of the wave function [math]\bar{\Psi}[/math] ? In Classical analogy, for a Lagrangian with the KE term [math]\left( \frac{1}{2m} \vec{p}^T \circ \vec{p} \right)[/math], derivatives with respect to momentum would include (one) terms, from the transpose of momentum, which is essentially the same mathematical object

Hello again everybody, i'm back again for another question that i've come across in my studies. According to many books I've read, a feature of gauge theory is that the fundamental field from which the excitations come from can not be measured in any way, but change by a gauge transformation. Whereas the excitation's observable quantities like charge and velocity can be measured, but can not be changed by a gauge transformation. That makes sense to me, but this next part is where I have trouble. I came across this problem in a book, then went to Wikipedia looking for an answer to my question. In Wikipedia's words "For example, in electromagnetism the electri…

What is rest mass as per QM, and even Physics. When I think of rest mass I think of it this way.. A car is moving slowly, the engine works up energy to " pull" the driver, passengers and all things in this car forward. When the car starts speeding up to a constant velocity it is thus out of its rest mass??? The mass of the car I am assuming is stationary>>? But it seems this was true when its in constant velocity>>? I think in this way because of fermions and bosons. Fermions having mass? and photons not having mass but being related to time? I have read over the internet about rest mas, but still it makes no sense whats so ever…

if matter (electron) and anti-matter (anti-neutrino) can interconvert, to charged pions, via charged W bosons [math]e^- + \bar{\nu} \leftrightarrow W^- \leftrightarrow \pi^-[/math] (does anybody disagree w/ the above reactions?) and if matter (electron) and anti-matter (positron) can interconvert, to neutral pions [math]e^+ + e^- + \gamma \leftrightarrow \pi^0[/math] (does anybody disagree w/ the above reactions?) then why couldn't the neutral W boson be involved? W bosons seem to be the pathways by which Fermions can interconvert, to-and-from Leptons & Hadrons. Is that true ?

http://wiki.physics.fsu.edu/wiki/index.php/Klein-Gordon_equation The above website says the KG equation admits "spontaneous transitions from positive-energy particle solutions, to negative-energy anti-particle solutions"... Q1: could someone succinctly show, such a "spontaneous transition" sort of solution ? Q2: i personally perceive, a parallel, between the opposite spins, of particles (left-handed) and antiparticles (right-handed)... and the opposite signs, of their frequencies, from the KG equation, which signs cause the phase-factors of particles to spin left-handed [math]e^{- \imath \omega t}[/math], and the phase-factors of antiparticles to spin right-ha…

The Larmor energy is written as a Hamiltonian [math]\Delta H = \frac{2 \mu}{\hbar Mc^2 e} r^{-1}\frac{\partial V(r)}{\partial r}(L \cdot S)[/math] The part we will concentrate on is [math]\frac{\partial V(r)}{\partial r}[/math] And we will use Greens theorem to derive an equivalence with this expression. We begin with the determinant [math]\nabla \times F = \begin{vmatrix}\hat{n}_1 & \hat{n}_2 & \hat{n}_3 \\ \partial_x & \partial_y & \partial_z \\F_x & F_y & 0 \end{vmatrix}[/math] You can write this as [math]\nabla \times F = \frac{\partial F_y}{\partial x}\hat{n}_1 - \frac{\partial F_x}{\partial y}\hat{n}_2 + (\frac{…

Imagine the standard Schrodinger's cat (let's call it AliceCat). It exists in a quantum superposition of both alive and dead until it is observed. But what if the observer is another Schrodinger's cat (let's call it BobCat)? A one way mirror lets BobCat observe AliceCat, but as BobCat is both alive and dead he is both observing and not observing AliceCat. What would happen? I don't think BobCat could simultaneously cause and not cause AliceCat's position to collapse into dead or alive. And what if the mirror were replaced by glass so that AliceCat and BobCat were observing (and not observing) each other? Am I right in thinking that only an observer that is n…

I've always loved quantum physics and recently came across lots of free time i was wondering if anyone had any websites, books, etc. that could help me learn more in depth about it like the math, equations, and more. I already now almost all the basic theories, particles, forces, and basic science behind them.

What I would love to understand as per the protocols of physics is: For instant C = 2*pi, here we are left with divisions of zeros?? How can anything that travels in a straight path use such a method?? Does "radians" come in different lengths??? Meaning that are radians " straight lines" as if though beaming outward like photons?? Example x travels A to B, in a straight line with no curves whats so ever... Is x straight distance from A to B considered the radian's distance in a straight line??? I found this converter link here, but somehow the straight line question does not seem to apply. Degrees and radians http://www.math…

Photons have an intrinsic angular momentum, pointing parallel or anti-parallel to their path of propagation, with a magnitude of exactly one unit of h-bar... yes? Thus, when electrons emit or absorb photons, they must spin-flip, which represents a change of -1/2 hbar <----> +1/2 hbar = one unit of h-bar... yes?

The double slit experiment tested over and over again, suggest that the electron knows it is being watched. If so then could "matter" know it is being watched by people. For example could my bath tub know I am watching it?? If yes: Why does it remain the same stationary size? Why does it not move away from me? Why does my bath tub stay at rest? Even better, how does my bath tub keep it's shape?? Are those the gluon particles? Thanks in advance.

if Z0 bosons can pair produce neutrinos & antineutrinos... and if photons are related to Z0 bosons... then can photons possibly pair produce neutrinos & antineutrinos ?

I am curious to see how the members feel about Higgs being confirmed and the research behind it. I personally am not impressed. I especially love their percentage of the particle they found being something else, which is loony math. Results in particle physics are ranked on a scale from zero to five "sigma." Last December the ATLAS and CMS teams said their data showed a two-sigma likelihood that the Higgs particle has a mass of about 125 gigaelectron volts (GeV)—about 125 times the mass of a proton, a positively charged particle in an atom's nucleus. They say higgs degrades to quarks rapidly after the collision. To me it seems if a particle behaves the way higgs i…