Quantum Theory

quote:- Confinement,which means that the force between quarks does not diminish as they are separated.Because of this,it would take an infinite amount of energy to separate two quarks;they are forever bound into hadrons such as the proton and the neutron. Yet an up quark and an anti-up quark,annihilate producing a gluon which then produces a top quark and an anti-top quark. MY question is if it takes an infinite amount of energy to separate 2 quarks,where do you get 2 free quarks to annihilate and produce top quarks that are separated,does it take an infinite amount of energy to separate top quarks? An infinite amount of energy would imply that separating 2 quarks…

As I understand it, the lines in this image are potential paths of virtual photons. What would make them bend like that?

Imagine an electron e- approaching a proton p+, at a distance [math]\Delta X[/math] away. The EM force, between those charged particles, is said to be mediated, by virtual photons, "borrowed into existence on a Heisenberg loan", according to the HUP. Now, naively, that EM force would plausibly be: [math]F = \frac{dp}{dt} \approx \frac{\Delta p}{\Delta t} \approx \frac{\hbar}{\Delta X} \frac{c}{\Delta X} \rightarrow \frac{\hbar c}{r^2}[/math] Such symbols seem to "say", that the virtual photons exchanged, between a pair of charged particles: have a characteristic wavelength, comparable to the particle separation distance, i.e. [math]\lambda \approx \Delta …

I've been trying to get my head round entaglement, locality etc and Bell and Aspect's experiments where particle spin was used as an indicator. If particles are in fact vibrating strings (if you accept this theory) how do they spin? It's easy to visualise a football like particle spinning around various axes but not a vibrating string. I'm sure it's not as simple as this and maybe "spin" is just a way of describing a mathematicall function, but I'm having to try and assimilate this in "quantum packets" and being able to visualise it helps. Thanks.

1 more question about wavefunctions. I understand what wavefunctions are (for the most part), but I still don't understand why they are waves. And yes, I know that the Schrodinger equation is a wave-equation...but is there any way for anyone to explain why wavefunctions are waves without bringing the schrodinger equation into this? Thanks, this question has been bugging me for ages.

So i accidentally saw this sight that says you can jump into other parallel universes and learn to be anything you wan to be. It had some science in it, and it is based on the belief that your thoughts and consciousness is really energy and the frequency of your brain atoms or something, so you can alter you consciousness's frequency and alter yourself into another universe, since they also say that our reality is just a Matrix (The Matrix?) . I'm wondering, is this even real or just another scam? Also, here is the link: http://www.quantumjumping.com/lp/subconscious?sr=1&gclid=CIrFmemopKYCFQ915QodlEJgpg

<I apologize if this seems like a disjointed collection of thoughts. That's just how my brain works.> I was thinking about quantum entanglement, and came to the idea that entangled particles share the same wavefunction. I've read nothing that validates this, but it seems like common sense to me: since a wavefunction is the superposition of states, and if two particles are made to become entangled they would share the same possible states...resulting in two wavefunctions that line up perfectly when overlapped, and can therefor be treated as one wavefunction. I feel like someone should have had this idea before, so is there anything that disproves this? Mo…

First, we need to know : 1. Electromagnetic radiation: The energy of photons, having properties of both particles and waves. The major wavelength bands are, from short to long: cosmic, ultraviolet, visible or “light,” infrared, and radio. 2. Quantum: The amount of radiant energy in the different orbits of an electron around the nucleus of an atom. 3. Quantum mechanics: The theory that has been developed from Max Planck’s quantum principle to describe the physics of the very small. The quantum principle basically states that energy only comes in certain indivisible amounts designated as quanta. Any physical interaction in which energy is exchanged can only exchange…

Is it possible to break down time from 1 second to 1 millisecond, to 1 nannosection, etc, until you can't break it down any further?

If all atoms have the same energy levels, as in the electrons in the ground state electron in lead wouldn't be closer than in hydrogen, and those energy levels can absorb only specific energies of light, why are there many different shaped orbitals?

(Theoretically) If you were to be traveling in you vehicle at the speed of light, and you turned on your headlights. would you see the OUTWARD projection of the photons? Or would the beams itself bend around the front bumper and shine out in a negative velocity?

what about this? from this article of Physicsworld.com

http://www.google.co...ved=0CBkQ9QEwAQ This simple shading illusion reminds us of our limited ability to accuratly process what we see. Q: Could entanglement be one of those evolutionary adapatations? The double split expirement certianly suggest that simply observing the photons changes thier pattern but I wonder if that is just a rationality of our limited comprehension? A: ??? Someone shed a little light. (or at least what my limited concepts can process as light)

So if you take two entangled particles and shoot a photon at one particle, will that particle really destroy the photon and have it re-appear on the other end comming out of the other particle? Because I think some nova or pbs program said that, and you'd think something like successful instantaneous materialization would make the headlines. I mean what they are saying has to be coming from somewhere, but it seems like a leap. How would you even measure that without destroying the entanglement?

I know that all things have wave-particle duality (even macroscopic objects). I'm fairly certian that macroscopic objects, since we observe them to be in more predictable locations, have an more irregularly shaped wavefunction that, say, photons (i.e., my wavefunction has a much higher probability amplitude where I am right now in space, though it extends elsewhere). My question is how the frequency of wavefunctions is relevant--or if frequency is relevant in wavefunctions at all. It seems like a simple question, but I can't find info on this anywhere! (For the record, I'm assuming that light, whose behavior we can easily observe/describe with waves, has a hi…

hi guys i got a question. most of times we see the source but that light cant be used to see things. i want to know why. for example we see star but we cant read book in that light but we can read book in sunlight. why/? light moves in form of electromagnetic waves and their energy is not consumed. please also give me more details related to above question

If the mass of the photon particles are zero, then how will the gravitational energy of black hole effect the benting of the light and how will light be atracted towards a black hole when light(photon particles) pass near the event horizon of a black hole?

My understanding of quantum physics is limited to the few weeks I took back in Freshmen year of college, so pardon the simplicity in my thinking. My question is how do we know that in the phenomenon we describe as quantum tunneling, that it's actually the same particle that we observe? The way it was describe to me was to imagine throwing a ball at a wall. Most of the time, the ball will bounce back, but in the quantum level there is a small chance that the ball will pass through the wall and appear on the other side. Could it be that the particle just got absorbed by the "wall" and the "wall" just spit out something that looks like the particle? (Here's where I…

In light of the recent developments at CERN has led me to investigate the possibility of superluminal fermionic neutrino particles in a series of modified equations from the work of Tsao Chang, a leading scientist in his area of research. First of all, I wanted to write down the equations describing how mass enters and how the yukawa coupling determines different mass sizes. Then I wanted to take it further, derive a Langrangian from the modified Dirac Equation and write it in terms of a Higgs field and then finally working out the Eigenvalues for the modified approach. The mass term is very important when speculating on the existence of a tachyonic fermion neutrino. …

Hello, whenever I come across bits and pieces of quantum theory I find it extremely interesting, but I have yet to come across a simplified (but not over-simplified), unified run-down of the primary components of quantum theory. I understand that the subject might not lend itself to such a thing, but if somebody would care to summarize the main points of quantum theory, that would be much appreciated. I'd like to be able to understand and take part in discussions concerning the subject. As for background knowledge, I'm currently enrolled in AP Physics, understand the basics of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and wave/particle duality, and have a fair knowledge of…

Even though space time is naturally flat, there's a bunch of different curves in it and even enough in our local space to distort light in some way, so doesn't that mean euclidean space doesn't actually exist in the universe because there is no place where a completely straight line can be drawn?

So I know that the energies and possible wave mechanics of matter in the universe are quantized, but do things cancel out in the classical world if its not a near perfect vibration? Because if I do experiments where I move water back and forth, if I do it at just the right frequency, I can sustain a wave who's periods perfectly fit within the container the water is waving in, but if I don't do it at just the right frequency, I don't know exactly what happens, do waves crash into each other too soon or not form too late and thus there is no self sustaining wave? Why exactly can't electrons exist at other decimal energies?

Revered Members, An electron in ground state makes its way to an excited state upon absorption of photon of energy, equivalent to energy difference between ground state and excited state, and after some time, it decays by emitting the photon and returns to the ground state. This is called spontaneous decay. For Laser action, population inversion and stimulated emission should occur. Now let me explain the scenario 1) An atom(electron) in the energy level E1 absorbs a photon and goes to a state of higher energy say E3 2) While decaying from E3 to E1, it reaches a metastable state E2. Now, due to longevity of the stay in E2 than in E3, we can achieve population invers…

If you ask me,magnetic forces are the stable form of eletricity

from this link That's awesome.