formerly conicet and universidad nacional del litoral
Asked 7th Sep, 2023
Why is it that only English universities only offer physics Masters required with current research's mathematical techniques and principles?
Most masters focus on general review of qm, classical mechanics, assesing students skills in classical yet heneric and self-value calculative and interpreting capabilities.
The English MSc's on the other hand, provide an introduction to the physical principles and mathematical techniques of current research in:
quantum f. Theory
cosmology and the early universe
There is also a particular focus on topics reflecting research strengths.
Graduates are more well equiped to contribute to research and make impressive ph. D dissertations.
Of course instructors that teach masters are working in classical and quantum gravity, geometry and relativity, to take the theoretical physics sub-domain, in all universities but the emphasis on current research's mathematical techniques and principles is only found in English university'masters offerings.
Top contributors to discussions in this field
All Answers (3)
If they do that its not so comon. Research is only really heavy with Ph. D. degrees.
However advanced lab work or elective courses closer to research is probably
offered at Masters level. Thats fine. If they go through required courses, the elective ones are fine.
I suspect only large departments can offer such variety.
Academic course work and research are very different ball games, at some stage you have to make
Μr Verch indeed My research, which was not fully developped at the time I asked my question, showed that this the case.
Still, a 30% offer the classic calculative phys quantities - based skills of big 4 (and less conceptual understanding assesment or less actual "doing the science" skills of qm, CM, statistical and thermal. Physics) which trends to be considered classic masters structilure or outdated.
Similar questions and discussions
An old question that is still fresh: Is gravity a Newtonian force or Einstein space-time curvature?
- Parviz Parvin
No gravitational wave was measured yet, no graviton was detected accordingly. On the other hand no space- time curvature was observable. There is no successful experiment to validate the current theories. What is the nature of the mysterious gravity? What is the velocity of this effect ?
What are the major and most effective refutations of Einstein’s Theories of Relativity? Question Asked December 6, 2019.
- Nancy Ann Watanabe
My question is: "What are the major and most effective refutations of Albert Einstein's Theories of Relativity?"
The question "Is Any Effective Refutation of Einstein’s Theories of Relativity Possible?" which was asked on April 2, 2018, has been declared closed. Many of the best Answers were probably posted at the beginning, in April of 2018, long before I joined Research Gate on the recommendation of some of my university colleagues. Out of respect for the initiator of the original Question, who states his decision to close his Question, I am posting a very similar question in the interest of accommodating the views of scientists who have not yet had an opportunity to answer the Question, and, possibly, the repeated and updated views of scientists who have already posted on the original Question at Research Gate from April 2, 2018, to December 2019.
Has the formula E=mvc been tested experimentally? and on which particle?
- Jamil Kooli
In my opinion, the E=mvc formula keeps a secret and this said secret will only be revealed when people have determined the formula and the value of the intrinsic energy of the electron. There had been a marriage between the formula E=mcc and the formula E=hf which has led to the Compton wavelength. But in my opinion it is a bad marriage because it has had a negative impact on the understanding and proper use of the formula E=mvc. I find that it was up to de Broglie to add a link equation which could have allowed him to determine the Compton wavelength equation without going through E=mcc. In my opinion, by determining the maximum speed of the electron, it is possible that this said speed is reached by the electrons in the sun, this speed could be considered as the limiting speed of a particle with mass. It is possible that this said speed serves as a reference as the limiting speed of a particle and it will be taken into account to calculate the maximum energy of each particle with mass to evaluate the mass of a particle at rest. In my opinion if photons have mass then the formula E=mcc is the good one where m is the mass of the photon.
Ιs time a fundamental property of the universe?
- Philippos Afxentiou
Since Einstein proposed the fundamental shiftbin thinking, that time and space are interwoven, people began to doubt time's fundamental it. Althoughtbitbis still ladenly agreed to be so.
Einstein made the proposal to deal with incompatibilities between properties of light and principles of classical mechanics, the science of describing motion its causes and what its possible (given certain kinematics and so-called dynamics parameters in a system) . This then led to the most hroad, novel and consistent confirmstions of any theory in science. Yet, doubt remains.
Is the existence of space-time replaced with the ubiquity of gravitons and photons into which is built the real and imaginary numbers of Wick rotation
- Rodney Bartlett
Here are a few thoughts of mine that say space can't be curved because it doesn't exist. What we call space is actually the ubiquitous presence of gravitons and photons. Light passing the Sun is refracted because these particles follow curved paths. This naturally means the virtual particles currently theorized to fill space don't exist (only gravitons and photons do).
This might mean (a) gravity and electromagnetism can undergo a particular interaction to form particles with mass (this is supported by Einstein's publication in 1919 of an article suggesting gravity plays a role in the composition of elementary particles), and (b) space, while filled with gravitons and photons, is the absence of the mass-generating interaction.
However, it’s very convenient to simply speak of curved space – just as we say the Sun rises and sets while neglecting to mention Earth’s rotation … or speak of waves travelling without referring to the lack of horizontal propagation - photons merely "bob up and down" like particles of water. Electromagnetism would be caused by a travelling gravitational wave causing excitation of pre-existing photons (either in so-called "space" or in masses like atoms and objects).
Consistent with the unity of space and time, time could be something built into gravitons and photons. I believe these particles (what we call "space") are built from binary digits and topology immersed in the 3rd dimension, that they interact to form mass by a process I call vector-tensor-scalar geometry, and that the 4th dimension of "time" which is built into the particles is the real plus imaginary numbers of Wick rotation.
The minimum energy of quantum particle in a box is hf/2 , is this a paradox?
- Ismail Abbas
In the solution of time-dependent schrodinger partial differential equation it is assumed that The minimum energy of quantum particle is hf/2 but not zero.
The question arises is there any rigorous mathematical physics proof?
¿La cuarta dimensión es la clave para comprender el mundo cuántico?
- Daniel Dario Moreno
La física cuántica es una rama de la física que estudia el comportamiento de la materia y la energía a escalas muy pequeñas, del orden de las distancias atómicas. El mundo cuántico está gobernado por leyes muy diferentes a las del mundo macroscópico, y sus propiedades son a menudo contraintuitivas.
Una de las características más sorprendentes del mundo cuántico es la superposición. Una partícula cuántica puede estar en dos o más estados a la vez, lo que significa que puede estar en dos lugares diferentes al mismo tiempo, o tener dos velocidades diferentes.
¿Es posible que la cuarta dimensión sea la clave para comprender el mundo cuántico?
Argumentos a favor:
- Analogía de la sombra: Un objeto de tres dimensiones puede proyectarse en dos dimensiones por su sombra. Esto sugiere que nuestra realidad de tres dimensiones podría ser la proyección de un objeto de cuarta dimensión.
- Percepción de los seres de cuatro dimensiones: En una cuarta dimensión, un ser de cuatro dimensiones podría ser capaz de ver un momento en múltiples estados. Esto explicaría la superposición cuántica, ya que un ser de cuatro dimensiones podría ver a una partícula cuántica en todos sus estados posibles al mismo tiempo.
- Inconsistencias con el mundo macroscópico: Las propiedades del mundo cuántico son a menudo incoherentes con las del mundo macroscópico. Esto sugiere que el mundo cuántico está sujeto a leyes diferentes, que podrían ser explicadas por la existencia de una cuarta dimensión.
Argumentos en contra:
- Falta de evidencia experimental: No hay evidencia experimental directa de la existencia de una cuarta dimensión.
- Especulación: La idea de que la cuarta dimensión es la clave para comprender el mundo cuántico es una especulación.
Does 4 dimensional spacetime have a physical time component?
- John A. Macken
An event in 4 dimensional spacetime is designated by coordinates x, y, z and t. Spacetime physically has the three spatial coordinates (x, y and z). Does spacetime also have a physical property that gives it a temporal coordinate? For example, the rate of time depends on the gravitational potential. Clocks run slower in the 4D space close to a large mass compared to the 4D space far from a large mass. Is this just an effect on physical objects such as clocks and atoms or does the space itself have a temporal property that is slowed by the effect of gravity?
This is a discussion question. Therefore, I will express my opinion. I believe in John Wheeler’s spacetime foam representation of spacetime. He said “Empty space is not empty. It is the seat of the most violent physics.” He then described spacetime on the scale of Planck length as having Planck length oscillations at Planck frequency. If spacetime has oscillations at a frequency that can be affected by gravity, then spacetime has an internal clock and a physical time component. Even the physical constants G, c, and ħ each have time components. It is not possible to define any of these three physical constants without introducing a local rate of time.
I think that spacetime must incorporate Planck frequency oscillations to achieve the temporal properties (the 4th dimension) of spacetime. Do you agree or disagree? If you believe spacetime does not have an internal clock (oscillations), then what determines the local rate of time?
Quantum theory poses deep challenges to the mechanical conception of reality that underlies classical physics. Yet today, over eighty years after its creation, its implications for our picture of reality remain enshrouded in uncertainty. In view of the current search for a more comprehensive theory of physics, it is vital that these implications be...
It is pointed out that the property of a constant energy characteristic for the circular motions of macroscopic bodies in classical mechanics does not hold when the quantum conditions for the motion are applied. This is so because any macroscopic body—lo-cated in a high-energy quantum state—is in practice forced to change this state to a state havi...
The straightforward proof of involutiveness of the set of integrals of motion for the general Calogero-Moser model is given for the classical as well as the quantum case.