Yeah, I'm not convinced that there are consistent QFTs with composite massless particles
We do have a serious discussion before on whether composite photons are possible, and our conclusion is that it is likely no QFT model will be consistent with them
and there are no experiments that suggest photon is composite
If you read the link provided above on the discussion, massive photons will be at odds with the experimental result that we get a inverse square law for electromagnetism, since any massive particles will have a much faster power law decay
not to mention massive photons will messed up a lot of things in any QFT model that tries to include it
I copied this from his profile. .......Writing in Google scholar "Kaliambos" one can see a) His paper Impact of Maxwell's Equation of Displacement current on Electromagnetic laws and Comparison of the Maxwellian waves with our model of Dipolic Particles presented in 1993 at the International conference, "
Our teacher has asked us to do the derivation of non-relativistic propagators in quantum mechanics in ket-bra notation. After a lot of searching on the Google I found some derivation but the explanation was missing. Please help me with the same.
yeah, while with the extra chat rooms and the blogs I managed to cut down a lot of flooding, it is still very serious
I have been slowly organising my ideas scattered throughout many chat rooms o the SE network in order to minimise flooding, but the process is very slow as I need to crawl through the transcript page by page
... these parameters include weirdness level, actual environmental hostility, presence of pretentious users or users that cannot be get along with, and many more. In general, anything that hinder The Plan ...
if we travel at speed of light then time is relatively slow for us
but doesn’t it mean we are moving away from source so frequency we measure is lesser than actual frequency and from Doppler effect we observe redshift
so time becomes slow for us or we observe redshift ?
1. We cannot travel at the speed of light. 2. If you meant that we are travelling at a speed close to the speed of light, then we still lack the information relative to what we are travelling at that speed. 3. What "source"?
@Fawad I have no idea what the watch and the window are supposed to have to do with what you said before. Please try to describe the full situation you are thinking about - we cannot read your mind!
Once you edit a .bib file, how do you get it to register asap so another document can just see the new reference when you type \cite{} and then actually load it :(
Advanced Computer programming concepts study.All day hardcore. Interview with top tech company tomorrow.At restaurant now going hardcore on mexican food. Then would head to my hotel room. Then study like there is nothing else that matters on earth. Tbe potential money is super epic. I could buy all my haters and make them clean my toilet with that much moolah lolz
I have a question about reflection of EM waves, if you don't mind
My understanding is: the mechanics behind reflection of light waves is just absorption and then emission. So when a light wave is incident on a reflective surface, the waves are absorbed by the atoms and/or electrons in the material, resulting in oscillation, which results in radiation, and so 'new' (if you like) light waves are emitted from the material. Is this correct?
So with the above understanding, light waves don't technically 'bounce' off of a reflective surface. Instead, they are absorbed and new light waves are emitted as a result.
I think it's the primary source of them that is considered, and you may find it interesting that the same phenomenon occurs when light passes through transparent media like glass.
That is very interesting. So does that mean that light doesn't actually pass through the glass, but instead is absorbed and then emitted as different light waves?
(by different I mean not the same light waves as those that entered the glass)
When a photon of light hits a mirror does the exact same photon of light bounce back or is it absorbed then one with the same properties emitted? If the same one is bounced back does it's velocity take all values on $[-c,c]$ or does it just jump from $c$ to $-c$ when it hits the mirror?
Or, is t...
Our teacher has asked us to do the derivation of non-relativistic propagators in quantum mechanics in ket-bra notation. After a lot of searching on the Google I found some derivation but the explanation was missing. Please help me with the same.
