Dauth's little corner of Science
#101
Posted 03 July 2008 - 17:04
Dead simple this time
If photons don't have mass, which of course they don't (discounting energy value as mass), how do they have momentum when p = mv? :S
I'm guessing the classic definition of momentum doesn't work in the quantum world. If this is the case then what does momentum mean in quantum physics?
Ladies and gentlemen we are floating in space
#102
Posted 03 July 2008 - 17:38
Lorentz law for invariant mass.
Momentum means the same thing in quantum physics, just in some cases there is an inherent quantum error (uncertainty principle)
#103
Posted 03 July 2008 - 17:48
#104
Posted 03 July 2008 - 19:24
Thanks a lot for the help btw.
I got yet another one for you if you don't mind It's nice to have an answer to the questions that are never explained to me (and that my teachers just don't know the answers too)
Right, another one on quantum physics
I know there is the controversial issue over the exsistance of gravity's gauge boson: the Graviton.
Surly if it exists then the effect of gravity will be one half of the speed of light (as the boson, to my knowlege, has to travel to the object back from the source). This could be tested relativly easily.
If this was true then it would have been done. But it hasn't, so I have my facts wrong again
Any idea where?
Thanks
Btw, out of interest, what did you do at university and where did you go?
You seemed to have picked up the technical side of what I read about flawlessly (unless your self taught, massive kudos to you if true) so whatever course it is I liked to have a look at it as a choise for when I go.
Thanks again, hope you don't mind me asking.
[Chyro-edit: posts merged. Please refrain from double posting.]
Edited by Chyros, 03 July 2008 - 19:55.
Ladies and gentlemen we are floating in space
#105
Posted 03 July 2008 - 20:54
I completed a degree in Physics with Theoretical Physics at The University of Manchester and I gained the title MPhys (hons) along with the 2:1
#106
Posted 03 July 2008 - 21:13
And that's the exact degree i went for an open day for the other day, looks great
Nice job with the 2:1
I'm sure i'll have more questions, just not quite atm
Talus
Ladies and gentlemen we are floating in space
#108
Posted 07 July 2008 - 12:28
#109
Posted 10 July 2008 - 13:08
Now onto the question.. why, can't an atom reach the absolute Zero? What is in the way of that? I only know what I said before in this reply.
Edited by Aftershock, 10 July 2008 - 13:09.
#110
Posted 10 July 2008 - 13:43
Without delving into a huge amount of thermodynamics, the entropy of the system requires that each step in cooling be smaller than the previous one, thus you need infinite number of repeats of a process to get to absolute zero.
#111
Posted 14 July 2008 - 20:22
Another question:
Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMB) is thermal blackbody microwave radiation, which apears to be almost isotropic, from the big bang and has a net movement away from the center universe, to my knowledge.
First question: Why is it microwave frequency when it's from the big bang, surly it would be high gamma frequencies? I've been told red shift is the cause and i've been told the temperature is the cause. But the red shift idea is a little counter intuative, why should an object have lower relative energy just because it's moving toward an observer?
Second question: If CMB has a net movent away from the center of the universe how is it everywere at once? Surly it will be a lot less prominent in it's origion and not isotropic.
Cheers for any help.
Talus.
Ladies and gentlemen we are floating in space
#112
Posted 28 July 2008 - 22:40
Space has expanded, there is no centre or edge for the radiation to be sourced at or congregate at.
#113
Posted 01 September 2008 - 12:23
I get the basics of how it works, but I'm not so confident as to how it is guaranteed security by quantum mechanics. Also, I keep seeing the equation
when looking at stuff about the uncertainty principle, but that's momentum and position. Do you know of an equation like that relating to polarisation states?
Sorry if it's a little hard to understand what I'm asking...
Some sources I'm looking at at the moment:
http://www.csa.com/d...overview.php#n6
http://en.wikipedia....um_cryptography
#114
Posted 01 September 2008 - 12:37
The equation there states if you know where a particle is to 10^-15m, it will have hbar/(2*10^-15) units of momentum. No polariser is perfect therefore a deviation slightly away from vertical or horizontal won't show up.
Polariser is like =, ideally only flat lines get through, but as you can see small angles can be accepted (left of bottom bar to right of top bar and vice versa).
I should point out, Alice, Bob and Eve are names used by physicists everywhere and does not relate to the people here .
After Alice and Bob have their key, if Eve tries to intercept and send on then the message that reaches Bob will not be the same as the one sent by Alice, and thus it will be garbled. If Eve intercepts before the key is decided upon then when it is used the computability with Bob will not be there and the message will be garbled again.
Hope this helps a bit.
#115
Posted 01 September 2008 - 12:56
I'm looking into this as part of my physics coursework, because I've done some stuff with cryptography before and find this practical application fascinating. However, the coursework needs to include me doing stuff with equations, and most of the stuff I've found so far just says "quantum theory states that..." without explaining how it does that.
#116
Posted 01 September 2008 - 13:02
There are options to study quantum cryptography, at second or third year degree level Physics/Computing. The equations require the understanding from doing the earlier years and they are also probably linked to a journal atm and not publicly available. I suggest that you look at the volume of data that could be transferred in this encryption.
#117
Posted 01 September 2008 - 13:06
#118
Posted 05 September 2008 - 17:24
Now especially at the one with the glass over it.
how does this happen? How can a grape + microwaves equal plasma balls?
#119
Posted 05 September 2008 - 19:50
Microwaves work by oscillating water molecules, the friction in turn generates heat.
The waves follow the same path at all times, so you have to rotate the object to get an even cook.
Now to the grape,
It wasn't moving this was not a huge issue here so can be ignored for the moment.
The microwaves heat the water molecules which evaporate some contents of the grape.
These evaporated gases form the plasma you see.
When the glass is on top, the plasma cannot dissipate as quickly so it stays around longer.
Hope this makes sense.
#120
Posted 05 September 2008 - 20:05
#121
Posted 05 September 2008 - 20:17
A plasma of carbon and oxygen is normally called a flame. So this is my instinct as too the reason.
#122
Posted 30 November 2008 - 09:31
______________________________________________________n->n__________________n->n________
Edited by Dr. Strangelove, 30 November 2008 - 10:41.
19681107
#124
Posted 30 November 2008 - 19:36
1/(1/x) = (1/1)*x = x
#125
Posted 01 December 2008 - 01:00
19681107
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users