Quantum Theory

The fermionic condensate is made of matter and the BEC is made of photons and gluons? Does this mean that the BEC is a liquid force field (or maybe a superliquid force field)?

Hi there My question is: "If light can a particle, does it have mass. If so how can something that has mass travel at the speed of light?" Please be gentle, I am no expert. Just pondering on something I thought of the other day. Also if any answers could be given in layman's terms I would be very grateful - - thanks for taking the time to read * can be a particle

ok so i have no idea what to look for but i was talking to someone who knows a little bit about quantum theory's and watches some of the newest discovrys of quantum physics and he mentioned something about when one of the two or three if you include gravitons, luxon particles interact with each other it will move simultaneously regardless of distance inferring faster than light reactions i want to no how much is fact and where i can get some more information on this topic

I know there was an experiment done where high energy electrons where fired at protons. From the scattered pattern produced by the electrons, it was found that protons have a non-uniform distribution of mass and charge. This helped to confirm the existence of quarks because they would case the proton to have a non-uniform distribution of mass and charge. However, I was wondering what other experimental evidence is there that quarks exist? Thanks in advance for your comments.

I had some questions about the atom that hopefully some of you may be able to answer. First question: How is it that electrons don't attract to protons within the nucleus and just annihilate with each other? They both have 1.6*10^-19 C charge that would attract one another. The only thing I could think of is there is some other type of force repelling the the electrons from the nucleus? This is just a guess at trying to explain this phenomenon. Second question: Why are electrons confined to specific energy levels? I don't understand how an electron can only be at specific distances from the nucleus. Third question: Why do neutrons even need to be paired withi…

Why Does My Magnifying Glass Not Work Infront Of My Camera? Hello, I was taking photos of some antique earnings but since they are rather small, 5 centimeters in length, I bought a magnifying glass to ensure that my DIGITAL CAMERA took crystal clear images with the best resolution. When I placed the magnifying glass in front of the earnings so to enlarge them, I then placed my digital camera infront of the magnifying glass to take the photos of the earrings... I noticed in the LCD screen of the digital camera, that the earnings "looked the same" rather with a magnifying glass or not.. I tweaked the shutter speed and aputure, set the digital camera to man…

Dear Fellow Physics Lovers, I'm looking to put together a blog discussing Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle and the some of its ramifications. The intent of the piece will be to educate people who have an interest in it, but limited knowledge of it. So that I can pitch what I say at the right level I need a better handle on what people think uncertainty is. I'd appreciate it if you would take a couple of minutes to write what uncertainty means to you in the context of quantum mechanics. I'll wait a few days before I post in this thread again. At that time please let me know if you'd like my input on the definition. If you don't wish to wait then feel free to PM m…

So, it is hard to decide where this should be... quantum theory seems best but it may cover many topics. So, what problems face unification. I will be aware of many problems brought up, but I am interested in the different opinions by the posters here. I will post my own after a healthy dose of other contributions... trust me though, the problems are much vaster than those just lying with quantum gravity. Enjoy for now.

I am new at quantum physics, so dont be harsh.. my question is that "Photons"(quanta of light) they are present in the forms of electromagnetic radiations. they have no mass.. but still they are said to be a Matter.. WHY????

Why is it that some radioactive decay trees go through stable isotopes? For example manganese-54 can beta-negative decay to iron-54 (a stable isotope), which then double beta-positives to chromium-54. The same thing occurs with potassium-40, which beta-negative decays to calcium-40 (a stable isotope), which then double beta-positives to argon-40. Moreover, I would have expected calcium-40 to be very stable since it is doubly magic.

From what I understand the wavelength of an object is given by: Planks constant/Momentum. Does this mean that when stationary(relatively) that particles have no wavelength and are therefore not waves? If so, why does a particle need to be moving to have a wavelike character? I have the feeling there is a simple answer but I would be grateful if it's cleared up, thanks.

I think that E=MC^2 is slightly wrong.... I also want to add the fact that E=MC^2 was tested by atomic.bomb... According to me, 100percent of the mass is not converted inti energy.. 1) Is this true?? 2) It is a simplied version of E2= (MC2)2 p2c2.. I am not able to figure out how "p2c2" vanish, during the process of simplification???

I was wondering, how come the magnetic moment of some isotopes are unknown? This cannot be related to the isotope's half life, as nickel-59 has an unknown magnetic moment, but a half life of 100,000 years. Also, I cannot believe that it is the case, that they have not been measured yet. Thanks in advance.

hi, whatz the structure of atom....can we see it through electron microscope?

I am curious about an issue raised in another thread of this forum: namely, that of the interpretation of atomic orbitals in light of the fact that electrons are particles, not waves. In most organic chemistry textbooks, the atomic orbitals are shown to be standing waves, with regions of positive amplitude and regions of negative amplitude (the 2p atomic orbital, for example). If wave/particle duality is obsolete, then how is one to interpret these pictures in textbooks? Are they merely mathematical functions that have no physical relevance? What I mean is, rather than talk about atomic orbitals (ψ(r,θ,φ)), which contain positive and negative phases, would it be more …

How do scientist mesure the speeId of light? And why are light photzons referred to as bosooons?? THANKS FOR THE HELP.. HAVE A GREAT DAY!

Is it possible to make different atoms of different elements,but with a small mass?Like having an element which behaves like oxygen but it has the mass of hydrogen.

Why don't we have a QFT for gravity? Is it because gravity is attractive and the force carrying particles will have to travel out from the centre of mass against the pull of gravity? Which may slow them.

When a charged particle emits a photon carrying the electromagnetic force, and it repels another charges particle, what exactly emits the photon? I think it's the quarks that make things charged so I assume they make say a proton and a neutron differ but How is the composition of quarks different?

Is something technically still existing even when it has 0 energy? I mean I guess if it has 0 energy, it has 0 mass, but if you have something like an "electron field", what is it existing as when it's not oscillating? How would it start some perturbation sequence? Is there some way to force electrons to have the same spin state in the same quantum state and cancel each other out and make them not exist anymore?

I would like some good references re Bell's Theorem. In particular, I would like simple derivations and alternative views. Thanks

A photon carries both an electric and magnetic oscillation, but why does it have both? How does it have both? Or is it just one of those math things where there "needs" to be some two oscillations to do something like also change the vector state or something for all of the rest of the math to work out properly? Or I guess, how does an electron jumping an energy level actually make two different oscillations? Also, how do we know those oscillations are perpendicular to each other?

If I have two different frames of reference, one of which would observe a photon at a very energy and one at a very low energy if the photon got to either one, but both frames of reference were equidistant from the photon source, the low energy photon would be much more delocialized, so wouldn't the observer who's frame of reference possibly observe a low energy photon before the high energy photon could be measured?

question.When an atom absorbs a photon is there an increase in the atoms mass?

Can someone clarify the meaning of quantum state in the Pauli Exclusion Principle? Does the principle mean that no two fermions can occupy the same place at the same time?