Quantum Theory

Is the Standard Model consistent with current observation? If not, how does the Standard Model fail? ron

Obviously explaining quantum physics is in no way an easy thing to do, but I was hoping that if anyone has a deep understanding then they MAY be able to provide a basic explanation of the main principles. If you feel you can, then please do; I'm sure it would be considered useful to many on here. I have a relatively strong understanding of physics in other areas, but quantum physics still blows my mind.

So, I read somewhere that antimatter can be considered as normal matter but moving in backward time. This might make sense theoretically, but, what does it mean physically ? It is a bit absurd, if you think about it.

I'm not an expert in physics, but I was reading the "Dancing Wu Li Masters" which discusses quantum physics.... I have a question about the quantum leap of electrons from one orbit (or state) to another. To quote an explanation off the web... The "quantum". When the electron makes a quantum leap, it suddenlychanges not only its orbit, but also its energy. In doing that, it Emits a burst of light. Technically speaking, it emists a packet of electromagnetic Waves. This packet, this burst, is called a "quantum." The quantum of light is called a photon. OK....so the electron emits a quantum packet of energy (a photon) when it makes a quantum leap to a lower …

But that's what I'm saying, the range of the solutions that you categorize them are limited by that, I guess to nail it down I would have to see the process in actio Well I haven't seen a particle with a spin greater than one, and it makes total sense because the spin is to do with the angle of the vector, and if you go around in a circle of all the different angles you eventually arrive back at the start, 360 is the same as 0 or 720, so spin has to be modular at some point, it wouldn't make sense if it wasn't.

Hi I was wondering exactly how the transfer of force between particles works in current gauge theories. It doesn't really make sense to me, shouldn't particles emit their energy away? But, when scientists come up with a solution to that problem, they say the boson "snaps back", but that doesn't make sense because when a boson interacts its effects then become real and it goes into an Eigenstate so it shouldn't be able to hold its superposition upon interaction with a fermion as to go back to it's parent particle, that would seem to violate the conservation of energy simultaneously as well.

How do Partice Accelerator's work? How do they speed the particles up so that it gets so close to the speed of light? Also what are particle accelerators used for?

Photonic crystals do not obey the Planck Black body curve: http://www.sciencene.../id/4290/title/ Guo Chunlei, associate professor of optics at the University of Rochester and his assistant, Anatoliy Vorobyev, used high powered lasers to create nano- and micro-scale structures on the surface of a regular tungsten filament. The tungsten filament is the small thin wire inside the light bulb. In doing this scientists can make the incandescent radiator 40 percent more efficient. The laser can also be used to make the light bulbs brighter and possibly even change their colors. http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=3385 Halogen IR (or halogen infrared) bulbs incr…

I SAW A REALLY COOL VIDEO ON SUPERFLUID HELIUM ON UTUBE. WT I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS Y WOULD FLUIDS NEAR 0 DEGREE KELVIN WILL BE FRICTIONLESS OR THEIR VISCOSITY WILL BE ZERO. ALSO Y WILL THE SUPERFLUID RISE ALONG THE WALLS OF ITS CONTAINERS? CAN SOMEONE PLEASE ANSWER THIS

When 2 hydrogen atoms bond to create H2 molecule, their atomic orbitals interfere to create a molecular orbital. Since hydrogen has 1 electron, there will be 2 electrons in H2 molecule. If they are in the same orbital, I assume they must have anti-parallel spins -- +1/2 and -1/2. So, my question is: ''How does an electron reverse its spin?''. If two hydrogen atoms have electrons with same spin, say +1/2, how does one of them 'reverse'? I thought that there is a conservation of total spin, so I guess that the electron might emit a photon (spin 1)?

What causes the wave function to collapse? Observation or Interaction? Can interaction theoretically occur without observation?

I know a little bit about everything. But I don't claim to know anything for sure. So, Would it be possible to harvest kinetic energy by quantum locking gold? Something I have read about in science fiction before. I was wondering if there would be any truth in the lie? I know some of the stuff H.G wells and Jules Verne wrote seemed to happen many years later. I am a poet. Also a student at Shawnee State University. I am thinking about taking botany so I can become a farmer, and maybe studying biochemistry and visual arts.

I am trying to grasp some concepts, perhaps relativity forum would be better for this - sorry if so. My question is directed to all who are familiar with concept of wave–particle duality and Young's double slit experiment. Out of curiosity (and being too lazy to try and do the calculations myself), I tried to search the Internet and find out how many photons can a bulb emit in 1 second. Answers varied from 2.5 x 10^13 to 5.5 x10^32. Well, it doesn’t really matter (don’t think I don’t understand that bulbs may vary), but the point is, the number is definite. Huge, but not endless. For the sake of clarity, let’s assume that a given bulb emits a little smaller number of ph…

What do people mean when they say that an electron has an INTRINSIC spin. Is it real ? And how does this create a dipole moment ? I thought only moving charges create dipole moments not a stationary spinning electron ?

Entanglement: 1) How do physicists physically separate two particles? 2) When we read that when one particle is observed it will instantly mirror its partner on opposite ends of the Earth or the universe, how would they transsport that particle to that far distant location? I would appreciate a reply in more layman's terms. Thanks.

can someone explain to me what is tachyon energy

So, I was just messing around with some practice questions in my university physics textbook and I came across a particular question which was fairly easy to answer but which I would like to take further - however, it may be too advanced for me at the moment being a first year university physics student. So, the question basically was: "The wavefunction [latex]\psi (x,t) = Ae^{i(k_1 x - \omega_1 t)} + Ae^{i(k_2 x - \omega_2 t)}[/latex] is a superposition of 2 free-particle wavefunctions, both k1 and k2 are positive. a) Show that this wavefunction satisfies the Schrödinger equation for a free particle of mass m. b) Find the probability distribution func…

Question is my understanding of a unified theory correct,that it's an attempt to unify the forces into 1 force.So that all the forces strong,weak-electro magnetic and gravity would all be different manifestations of 1 force(gravity)?

we all know of the mother paradox regarding time travel.what if I say that we don't travel to our own past........rather we travel to an alternate universe where the time is running behind our time.then there is no chance any paradox.........

The optical two-source interference effect due to Hull (1949) has largely been overlooked by the history of quantum mechanics. Mandel and Fleegor brushed up the effect by reducing the signal strength of the sources and reducing exposure times for interference collection. In the end this effect was only looked at for its theoretical insights concerning the photon/EM wave. But is there more to this effect? Can it be used for other purposes like spin/polarization recombination of photons? The question is about the use of two-sources for optical effects other than simple indistinguishability interference. Is it possible to produce a coherent state by combining (with a beamsp…

One must first realize how extremely complicated quantum mechanics is and how far reaching it goes.. this is why it is very difficult to explain it in a few neat sentences and paragraphs because in most cases it takes about 300 pages to describe it accurately (in addition to describing the wholly metaphysical aspect of it which we are doing here!)<br style="font-family: verdana, geneva, lucida, 'lucida grande', arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: italic; background-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br style="font-family: verdana, geneva, lucida, 'lucida grande', arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: italic; background-color: rgb(0…

Is it true that an individual quantum exists anywhere & everywhere at one & the same time till it is observed & then at the very moment of observation it withdraws itself from this anywhere & everywhere & becomes one single particle once again at the site of observation? Your thoughts?

Is planck length a property of particles or a property of space? In other words, is there such a thing as planck length because space is only "accurate" to that distance (almost like how GPS are only accurate to a few feet, and therefore can't distinguish between two objects closer than that), and if so, what could cause this? Or is there such a thing as planck length because even after a particle's wavefunction has been collapsed, it still has uncertainty of location down to planck length? Or is it due to something else entirely?

When hydrogen atoms collide to fission a helium atom, a proton is gained. So, I would assume that the strong force of that atom must also have strengthened to contain the extra energy inside. Is this asumption correct?

Everything moves in the path of least resistance. So for a particle to leap from here to there without moving through any distance inbetween must be the path of least resistance. So, what is the difference between space that was occupied and the space that was leaped to and the space inbetween? Is it a difference in the time dialation properties of this space compared to that space? Can it be calculated as some space/energy ratio by a shear genius formula? or something else like dark matter density? I wonder what the leading theory is.