Ashish

Has anyone considered the notion that (and I say this with Respect to the community so don't think it as an attack) that Light is in fact not moving at all? Maybe it is only Matter/Particles of a (Lower) vibratory State that are in fact doing all the moving? It seems to be a plausible question if we stare at it a moment.

This could very well be why we have trouble interpreting its where about..after all, we passed it long ago lol.

I really appreciates you for your good imagination idea

that impressed me

no, they exist in the macroscopic as well. everytime you walk through a door you form a diffraction pattern.

Really nice

But how can you tell me that, If I assume it to be a shadow pattern which caused because some of the photons were blocked by my body ( not so because not yet proved)

Well if for example you fire individual electrons at two slits, you get an interference patter on a detector on the other side of the slits, which is clearly a property of waves as it means the electrons travelled through both slits.

Yes but not on only one electron but it takes huge numbers of electron to come upto results of old ones.

But I think that from this (double-slit experiment with photons or other microscopic particles) that there is nothing like waves.

Which definition of vacuum are you using?

 

If it's the complete absence of matter and energy, then no, as several posts have explained.

 

If it's a relative lack of matter, i.e. a significantly lower pressure than atmosphere, then yes, most of the universe is a vacuum.

Can you explain me clearly

Its really happened with me that our current theories of physics, such as the Standard Model or relativity, are flawed and present some alternative of mine too.

As you wrote that "However, when coming up with a new theory it is important that it should be better than the old one. Therefore the first step of coming up with a new theory is a sufficient understanding of the old one. You have to make sure that your new theory does everything at least as well as the old theory, otherwise the old theory remains more attractive. This is very difficult mainly because our current theories are so spectacularly good in their predictions."

For this I want to tell you that the word "Particle and Wave", confused me so much that I started having a great studies of it (even though I'm a final year student of Engineering in Information Technology) so as to get what the previously scientists used to imagine to make the theories come upto right way i.e what idea had strucked them.

And now I'm steping in this by sufficient understanding of the old one. Whether there is wave or not and If I say that there is nothing like a wave in this whole universe, then I've to explain all the theories such as

1)Interference

2)Diffraction

3)Reflection

4)Refraction

5)Dispersion

6)Polaraization

in particles (with some new idea), as Newton introduced the concept of corpuscules.

And then comes the

1)Photoelectric effect

2)Compton effect..... and so on till now

we are assuming the idea of Einstien (photon) and DeBroglie's Equation.

Then this has to be followed to persuade scientists that the Standard Model is wrong, then you have to explain why this is a coincidence or show that your new theory predicts to at least this accuracy.

Thanks for your suggestion

Can you explain me little about distribution function and density

They really exhibit wave properties. You can make electrons, protons, neutrons, even atoms and molecules, interfere with each other.

Only to microscopic world

When talking about things on such a small scale the words particle and wave get a bit mixed up, it depends on how you observe them, if you try and observe wave properties you will get them, if your try and observe particle properties you will get them as well :|

I think that everything in this universe is made up of particle (matter and antimatter) then how there can be a misconception of wave.

That was something I was wondering, I assume that you can get photon-antiphoton pairs created...

but can you tell me that will that be a particle or wave

electromagnetic waves can be seen.

 

mechanical waves can be seen in bits of string and springs via electromagnetic waves

 

matter waves can be seen in the air and ocean again via electromagnetc waves.

 

light itself is an electromagnet wave.

I'm really confused that why we say that when any wave is to described we take an example of String set into vibration. Why is so can you tell me clearly

As to your reference that [energy forms matter-antimatter pairs, which annihilate during the very short time which you are observing them in.

So this means that particles are being created and destroyed all the time, and exist for very very very very short time scales...]

Is that possible that there may not be particle but energy forms wave.

Nothing is perfect vacuum, when you start getting close you get things called vacuum fluctuations, which is a quantum effect.

 

But even in space there is allot of gas/dust just floating about...

Thanks for your reply

Can explain the term vacuum fluctuations, which is a quantum effect.

What does actually density and distribution function means?

Is universe really vaccum or any portion of it?

Why the speed of light is constant i.e.

c = 3*10^8 m/s

can it be slower or higher than this.

Mostly the waves can be classified into -

1) Mechanical Waves

2) Electromagnetic Waves

3) Matter Waves

So is there any wave that can be seen

I mean to say that how a particle can exhibit a wave nature, according to DeBroglie's Equation

Well thanks

so can I have a conclusion from ur answer that photon are also a particle or not

same as normal matter but with reversed charge. reacts violently when contacting normal matter by annihilation into two or more gamma photons. thats really about it unless you want more specific examples.

That means if ever any antimatter get in contact with an noraml matter it will annihilation into two or more gamma photons, or their are some constraints.

please go to the link below

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3_T6XCpRvA

Whats the real concept behind a wave?

or just its an imaginary for proving certain theory.

What is antimatter?

Can anyone tell me completely about antimatter.