Notices
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Moved : Farsight's QM question

  1. #1 Moved : Farsight's QM question 
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    652
    Does a particle at rest behave like a wave? Yes. because it is a wave. See electron diffraction on wikipedia. We can diffract electrons, and make them interfere. They are definitely waves. Now see atomic orbitals also on wikipedia and pay careful attention to this sentence: The electrons do not orbit the nucleus in the sense of a planet orbiting the sun, but instead exist as standing waves. Then think about pair production where we can create an electron and a positron from two photons, and electron-positron annihilation which typically results in two photons. Note that photons have a wavelength and a frequency, and are electromagnbetic waves rather than billiard-ball particles. With evidence supplied by electron magnetic dipole moment and the Einstein-de Haas effect, it seems reasonable to assert that even when not within a nucleus, the electron exists as a standing wave. Also note that a standing wave isn't static - in for example optical cavity light is moving both this way ← and that way → at the same time. The standing wave might seem to be static or stationary, but actually it's dynamical. You tend not to see too much about standing-wave electrons in physics texts, but here's something in an online chemistry textbook.
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    504
    Quote Originally Posted by Farsight View Post
    Does a particle at rest behave like a wave? Yes. because it is a wave. See electron diffraction on wikipedia. We can diffract electrons, and make them interfere. They are definitely waves. Now see atomic orbitals also on wikipedia and pay careful attention to this sentence: The electrons do not orbit the nucleus in the sense of a planet orbiting the sun, but instead exist as standing waves. Then think about pair production where we can create an electron and a positron from two photons, and electron-positron annihilation which typically results in two photons. Note that photons have a wavelength and a frequency, and are electromagnbetic waves rather than billiard-ball particles. With evidence supplied by electron magnetic dipole moment and the Einstein-de Haas effect, it seems reasonable to assert that even when not within a nucleus, the electron exists as a standing wave. Also note that a standing wave isn't static - in for example optical cavity light is moving both this way ← and that way → at the same time. The standing wave might seem to be static or stationary, but actually it's dynamical. You tend not to see too much about standing-wave electrons in physics texts, but here's something in an online chemistry textbook.
    Feel free to explore the references, but also feel free to ignore Farsight and his nonsense. Farsight, is a well-known British purveyor of utter nonsense, complete with a self-publlished (IIMO a legitimate publisher would not touch this thing with a ten foot pole) nonsense book on relativity and a "theory of everything" and an appearance on a British conspiracy theory TV show. His views on quantum mechanics are, um, unique.

    One would do better to listen to and read Richard Feynman on the subject of quantum mechanics. His book QED is an excellent overview for the layman on quantum electrodynamics. It is based on these lectures --http://www.vega.org.uk/video/subseries/8

    Feynman was an expert. Farsight is not.

    http://www.physicsdiscussionforum.or...ivity-t66.html

    http://www.richplanet.net/starship_m...p?ref=7&part=1
    Last edited by DrRocket; 03-06-2013 at 05:15 AM.
     

  3. #3  
    Administrator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    1,378
    Farsight, I have received your "report" about post #2 by DrRocket.
    In situations like this I as a moderator must weigh the interests of a specific member against the interests of the forum community as a whole, as well as those of any casual readers/guests being redirected here from search engines. The main raison d'etre of this forum is to provide a platform for the discussion of serious scientific topics in physics, and it has right from the beginning been decided that we shall do so in a more conservative manner as is the case on some other forums. As such we are committed to reserve the main sections for established science only; DrRocket's assessment is accurate in that your views are not in accordance with current scientific consensus, as you have demonstrated on a number of Internet platforms and other media outlets. Your reputation and previous online activity clearly precede you, in this case. I am aware that you do not agree with that assessment, since you consider yourself to possess some sort of superior understanding, as you have stated on several occasions; let me assure you though that this is not actually the case. We do not want to have a situation where unsuspecting visitors browse our main sections for answers to their inquiries, only to find highly questionable material which has little to do with real world physics.

    Farsight, if you wish to remain and further participate here I am asking you to henceforth restrict your threads and posts to the "Alternative Theories and New Ideas" section; this is the fairest solution I can come up with under the circumstances, as the moderator team here will not waste time and effort trying to dissect your every post for unfitting material. This is a physics forum, as the name implies - dissenting views are allowed, but only in the appropriate section. Going forward, all posts and threads by yourself will thus automatically be moved to "New Ideas". Alternatively, if you no longer wish to participate and would like your user account to be closed then please PM any moderator and we will lock it for you.

    As for your question - as DrRocket has quite accurately pointed out, quantum objects can never be brought to rest, so the question in itself is meaningless.
     

  4. #4  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    652
    I've sent you a PM Markus.
     

  5. #5  
    Administrator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    1,378
    Please note that there has been of change of forum rules - with immediate effect, The Physics Forum no longer permits the presentation and discussion of personal theories which are not based on current scientific understanding :

    http://www.thephysicsforum.com/annou...e-changes.html

    This thread is therefore now locked.
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •