Science topics: PhysicsQuantum Physics
Science topic

Quantum Physics - Science topic

Explore the latest questions and answers in Quantum Physics, and find Quantum Physics experts.
Questions related to Quantum Physics
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
2 answers
I am looking for some one to collaborate with regarding my research article...
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi, Dear Johannes Sikoka
I am a Master of Science student at department of Mathematics. My field of interests applied mathematics and mathematical physics. We can work applied mathematics and mathematical physics. We can apply fractional differential equation on theoretical physics and quantum physics. You know schröndinger equation and if you apply this topic on quantum theory, I will help you for completing solving fractional order schröndinger equation. But, I want to learn about your career. Are you master of science or Phd student in university?
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
1 answer
[This picture is from class lecture slides, unfortunately whose source (and copyright attribution) is unknown to me and also course instructor.]
(n= principal, l= subsidiary/orbital m=magnetic and s= spin quantum number)
As I came through study materials,
Auger Electron Spectroscopy (AES) peaks are implicitly numberd as (absolute value of) magnetic plus/minus spin quantum numbers e.g. one (1/2) for s, two for p (1/2, 3/2), three for d (1/2, 3/2, 5/2), four for f (1/2, 3/2, 5/2, 7/2); thus 1 for K, 1+2=3 for L, 1+2+3=6 for M and 1+2+3+4= 10 variants of Auger emission from N (i know 3 shells are involved in a auger with these indices unwritten often e.g. Al KLL, U MNN...)
But for X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS), the peak labels implied involves (absolute value of) subsidiary plus spin quantum numbers, that is 1 for s (1/2), 2 for p (1/2, 3/2), 2 for d (3/2, 5/2), 2 for f (5/2, 7/2)
That means, no XPS with d_(1/2), f_(1/2) or f_(3/2) indices would be possible. But why is this so?
One can say, interaction of electron spin magnetic moment with subsidiary magnetic moment (the so-called LS coupling) is more important for photoelectron emission, while spin plus magnetic orbital moment is more important for auger emission. Why is this so? whatever the selection rules maybe involved, why it physically exists?
I know that LS coupling works better for lighter and JJ coupling for heavier elements. but both involes l and s; all individual l sum to L and all individual s sum to S, and this L and S precesses around net magnetic moment for LS coupling. and for JJ coupling, individual l and s combines to form individual j, all j combines to J and precesses around net magnetic moment. Nowhere I see m here in the picture
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Sumit, thank you for a nice question! I suspect that the difference between 2 notations, that the first one means the energy level or shell, so, for example, K shell can consist of 2 electrons, L 8 electrons ( L1 2, L2 2 and L3 4 anD overall it’s 8)and so on, the formula is 2n^2, so you see that when we talk about about shell one talks about several electrons, for the second notations you talk always about one electron on some level, this means that spin projection can be only plus minus 0.5, therefore only d 3/2 and 3/2 exist , for 0.5 one would need and electron with spin projection 3/2, which doesn’t exist, however for shell notations it’s fine, one just takes 3 electrons. For XPS it’s more convenient to talk about one electron notation because only one electron is involved and kicked out, however for Auger effect it’s always 2 of them, hope that my answer helps you.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
4 answers
#nonlinearoptics #quantumchemistry #computationalchemistry #multiphoton #absorption #twophotonabsorption #tpa #mpa #optics #quantum #physics #chemistry
Relevant answer
Answer
Shiva Mahmoudi , Stam Nicolis and the other repliers,
It's not only in multiphoton absorption that appear virtual intermediate states. The team of prof. Savasta showed that even in a single photon absorption may appear virtual states. Their article
L. Garziano, V. Macrì, R. Stassi, Omar Di Stefano, F. Nori, and S. Savasta, “A Single Photon Can Simultaneously Excite Two or More Atoms”, arXiv:[quant-ph] 1601.00886v2 .
is complicated, I recommend to read instead, the section 5 of my article
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
23 answers
Is it a problem of philosophy, language, physics, thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, or brain physiology? Or something else? Or beyond understanding?
A physiological approach is discussed by Joseph LeDoux (in The Deep History of Ourselves, 2020) among other authors. A physics orientation is considered in Deepak Chopra, Sir Roger Penrose, Brandon Carter (How Consciousness Became the Universe: Quantum Physics, 2017). David Rosenthal has written several books of philosophy about consciousness. And Bedau 1997 and Chalmers 2006. Which is the right conceptual reference frame? Or is more than one required?
Relevant answer
Answer
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
1 answer
I'm searching for a good collaborator or a research group that might want to tackle an interesting problem involving the relationship between quantum dots generating nanoparticle clusters and their DNA/proteins corral. This relationship is encapsulated by geometric proximity, that is I'm looking for someone who might know how quantum mechanics impacts something like these nanoparticles, such as how close a nanoparticle is to another nanoparticle or a protein and whether sized clusters form. Ping me if you're in the bio sciences, computational biology, chemistry, biology or physical sciences and think you might be able to shed some light on the above.
Relevant answer
Answer
Navjot Singh This might surprise you but I recommend you analyse the problem without using quantum theory. If you take a look at the preprint linked below you will see a different approach to the analysis of molecular bonds:
This is based on the Spacetime Wave theory and shows how a stable bond is formed when the electrostatic and electromagnetic forces are in balance.
Richard
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
1 answer
Literature searches show that there are many papers and books on emerging quantum theory, but it seems that no specific model has ever been proposed. Here is such a proposal: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361866270
The model describes wave functions as blurred tangles, using the ideas by Dirac and by Battey-Pratt and Racey. The tangles are the skeletons of wave functions that determine all their properties. The preprint tries to be as clear and as pedagogical as possible.
In quantum theory, tangles reproduce spin 1/2, Dirac's equation, antiparticles, entanglement, decoherence and wave function collapse. More interestingly, the deviations from quantum theory that the model predicts imply that only a limited choice of elementary fermions and bosons can arise in nature. Classifying (rational) tangles yields the observed elementary and composed particles, and classifying their deformations yields the known gauge theories.
Given that the text aims to be as understandable and enjoyable as possible, feel free to point out any issue that a reader might have.
Relevant answer
Answer
A related development is, by Torsten Asselmeyer-Maluga, https://arxiv.org/pdf/1910.09966.pdf
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
19 answers
I was trying to get an insight into quantum computing (QC) for a research purpose. However, every source was filled with lots of technical terms with less explanation. It becomes very difficult for us those who want to learn QC with no knowledge before.
Is there any source where beginners can learn QC with zero background knowledge?
Thanks in advance.
Relevant answer
Answer
You are most welcome dear Anik Islam Abhi . Wish you the best always.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
10 answers
If something is next to something without extension that itself has no extension, it never manages to actually be SPACE.  Instead it is the juxtaposition of non extended singularities, manufactured into a matrix in whose connection singularities are impossible.  It makes no sense to me how space can be the juxtaposition of non extended and non extendable single locales who generate a system of ways of articulating spacial relations of all objects made up of material. 
How can material be made of nothing more than frequency of strings working harmoniously.  It makes no sense quantum Mechanics...it must be wrong as a model goes, even though it's models are enormously precise in some of their predictions. 
IF I am wrong and it is correct can anyone please explain to me how something non extended can be next to something else non extended to between the two of them form a displacement? It's impossible right?  So please explaing Quantum Mechanics to me then.
Relevant answer
Answer
They cannot have extensions .They act in such a manner as to mathematically represent extensions .
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
21 answers
Dear Sirs,
In the below I give some very dubious speculations and recent theoretical articles about the question. Maybe they promote some discussion.
1.) One can suppose that every part of our reality should be explained by some physical laws. Particularly general relativity showed that even space and time are curved and governed by physical laws. But the physical laws themself is also a part of reality. Of course, one can say that every physical theory can only approximately describe a reality. But let me suppose that there are physical laws in nature which describe the universe with zero error. So then the question arises. Are the physical laws (as an information) some special kind of matter described by some more general laws? May the physical law as an information transform to an energy and mass?
2.) Besides of the above logical approach one can come to the same question by another way. Let us considers a transition from macroscopic world to atomic scale. It is well known that in quantum mechanics some physical information or some physical laws dissapear. For example a free paricle has a momentum but it has not a position. Magnetic moment of nucleus has a projection on the external magnetic field direction but the transverse projection does not exist. So we can not talk that nuclear magnetic moment is moving around the external magnetic field like an compass arror in the Earth magnetic field. The similar consideration can be made for a spin of elementary particle.
One can hypothesize that if an information is equivalent to some very small mass or energy (e. g. as shown in the next item) then it maybe so that some information or physical laws are lossed e.g. for an electron having extremely low mass. This conjecture agrees with the fact that objects having mass much more than proton's one are described by classical Newton's physics.
But one can express an objection to the above view that a photon has not a rest mass and, e.g. rest neutrino mass is extremely small. Despite of it they have a spin and momentum as an electron. This spin and momentum information is not lost. Moreover the photon energy for long EM waves is extremely low, much less then 1 eV, while the electron rest energy is about 0.5 MeV. These facts contradict to a conjecture that an information transforms into energy or mass.
But there is possibly a solution to the above problem. Photon moves with light speed (neutrino speed is very near to light speed) that is why the physical information cannot be detatched and go away from photon (information distribution speed is light speed).
3.) Searching the internet I have found recent articles by Melvin M. Vopson
which propose mass-energy-information equivalence principle and its experimental verification. As far as I know this experimental verification has not yet be done.
I would be grateful to hear your view on this subject.
Relevant answer
Answer
Information isn't a special kind of matter-it's a property of any kind of matter, that describes the state matter is found in.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
8 answers
Hi there,
I was wondering if anyone here is aware of any quantum physics demo kits that are commercially available.
I have so far found these two:
  1. Quantenkoffer by qutools - very comprehensive on multiple levels (beginner, intermediate, expert), but very expensive
  2. phasespacecomputing.com - higher level quantum information experiments, not sure about $$$
If anyone is aware of anything else, please add your information below. Shameless self-promotions are encouraged.
Thanks
Markus
Relevant answer
Answer
There's the interface by IBM: https://research.ibm.com/quantum-computing and that by Google: https://quantumai.google/ and there is this interface for quantum circuits: https://qiskit.org/documentation/stubs/qiskit.circuit.QuantumCircuit.html
They're all free. After that it depends on the background of the users.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
24 answers
Both photon and electron are spinning polarized particles. They have coexisting wave and particle properties (wave particle duality). In Double Slit Interference experiment, particle detector can be used to influence the phase angles of particle waves such that the coherency is disturbed and the interference patterns are diminished or even totally disappeared. However, the interruption of the interference patterns cannot to be used to prove the non-existence of wave property, or even to prove that wave and particle properties cannot coexist at the same time under observation (with detector). Therefore, “Complementarity Principle” is not true.
If you have any different opinion? Please share with us in this forum.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
6 answers
A rigid body with vertical proper length J rises along the Y direction in an inertial frame S(T,X,Y) with constant proper acceleration, therefore me may write the equation of hyperbolic motion of the body along the Y direction as:
1) J2 = Y2 - c2 T2
Using Born´s definition of rigidity, the proper length “J” must be invariant under Lorentz transformations between instant commoving inertial frames where the proper length (squared) J2 coincides with the line element (squared) along the Y direction: Y2 - c2 T2. It is straightforward to see that this is the case just for boosts along the Y direction. If the velocity of the body and its inertial commoving frames have an aditional constant component along the X direction, the line element is different, the vertical length J cannot be invariant in the inertial comoving frames and we get a violation of Born´s rigidity.
Relevant answer
Answer
And it is a pitty that the students fail to take into account simultaneity of relativity since it is a straighforward consequence of the two more basic priciples of SRT:
1) Constancy of speed of light.
2) Equivalence of inertial frames.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
6 answers
It might be a stupid question to ask, but is it possible to change the strength of the vacuum fluctuation locally, i.e. create an area in which the local density of virtual particles is lower than in other areas? Specifically I think of QED and a certain resonator in which all the supported ground state wavefunctions have a "hole" (= vanishing wave function) in the middle of the resonator (is that even possible due to completness constraint of the wavefunctions?). As per my understanding this would imply lower vacuum fluctuations in that "hole".
My physical intuition tells me that such a device is impossible, because vacuum fluctuation are very fundamental linked with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and because of "homogenity" of spacetime (at least in the framework of flat space time, ignoring Unruh-effect etc.). However, I do not have any good explanation yet, which rules out the resonator I described above. An inhomogeneity in the vacuum fluctuations could be measured immediately, for example via the lifetimes of elementary particles.
I really look forward to references, opinions and suggestions on this topic.
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Philip Rübeling,
what you adress is possible, and is described in theories of Cavity QED.
See, for example, the book "Introduction to Quantum Optics - From a Semi-classical Approach to Quantized Light" from Grynberg, Aspect, and Fabre, Complement 6B Cavity quantum electrodynamics.
Kind regards
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
51 answers
Heidegger said that philosophy is thinking. What else is philosophy? What is the ultimate aim of philosophy? Truth? Certainty? …
Heidegger said that science is knowledge. What else is science? What is the ultimate aim of science? Knowledge? Truth? Certainty? …
Relevant answer
Answer
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
4 answers
This question is the first step of a project which is in the start-up phase and aimed at understanding the physical meaning of exotic dimensions whose existence is proven in the work Linear microbundles.
We refer to Question 10.2 in the work Linear microbundles.
Relevant answer
Answer
I know this. My question is about what happens varying the shape of inhomogeneity.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
10 answers
Scientists have been using quantum theory for almost a century now, but embarrassingly they still don’t know what it means. An informal poll taken at a 2011 conference on Quantum Physics and the Nature of Reality showed that there’s still no consensus on what quantum theory says about reality — the participants remained deeply divided about how the theory should be interpreted.
Relevant answer
Answer
No, it just needs to be learned. Any standard textbook will do. But just like with any theory, there are questions that make sense and questions that don’t. The error is to think that quantum mechanics can be deduced from classical mechanics. Reality turns out to be quantum, not classical. It’s remarkable how many people still have difficulties with this.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
8 answers
Consider two particles A and B in translation with uniformly accelerated vertical motion in a frame S (X,Y,T) such that the segment AB with length L remains always parallel to the horizontal axis X (XA = 0, XB = L). If we assume that the acceleration vector (0, E) is constant and we take the height of both particles to be defined by the expressions YA = YB = 0.5 ET2, we have that the vertical distance between A and B in S is always (see fig. in PR - 2.pdf):
1) YB - YA = 0
If S moves with constant velocity (v, 0) with respect to another reference s(x,y,t) whose origin coincides with the origin of S at t = T = 0, inserting the Lorentz transformation for A (Y = y, T = g(t - vxA/c2), xA = vt) into YA= 0.5 ET2 and the Lorentz transformation for B (Y = y, T = g(t - vxB/c2), xB = vt + L/g) into YB= 0.5 ET2 we get that the vertical distance between A and B in s(x,y,t) is:
2) yB - yA = 0.5 E (L2v2/c4- 2Lvt/c2g)
which shows us that, at each instant of time "t" the distance yB - yA is different despite being always constant in S (eq.1). As we know that the classical definition of translational motion of two particles is only possible if the distance between them remains constant, we conclude that in s the two particles cannot be in translational motion despite being in translational motion in S.
More information in:
Relevant answer
Answer
Larissa, I might be wrong but I believe that you wanted to post in another quest on dark matter and dark energy.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
5 answers
Please, see the attached file RPVM.pdf. Any comment will be wellcome.
More on this subject at:
Relevant answer
Answer
I think that an interesting point is that, using units with c = 1, the 4-velocity (dt,dx,0,0) is a 1-tensor that is the same for any offset of clocks of the inertial frame. Then we have that the 4-velocity (dt,dx,0,0) transforms the same for any synchronization, it satisfies the Einstein addition of velocities and consequently it also satisfies the principle of constancy of speed of light. On the other hand, as it behaves like a tensor under Lorentz transformations, the relativity principle holds for it an for all derived 1-tensors like velocity, acceleration and so on.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
7 answers
You can find the wording in the attached file PR1-v3.pdf. Any comment will be wellcome.
More on this topic at:
Relevant answer
Answer
I think that an interesting point is that, using units with c = 1, the 4-velocity (dt,dx,0,0) is a 1-tensor that is the same for any offset of clocks of the inertial frame. Then we have that the 4-velocity (dt,dx,0,0) transforms the same for any synchronization, it satisfies the Einstein addition of velocities and consequently it also satisfies the principle of constancy of speed of light. On the other hand, as it behaves like a tensor under Lorentz transformations, the relativity principle holds for it an for all derived 1-tensors like velocity, acceleration and so on.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
5 answers
Hi,
I have a question in the field of computational physics. What is the physical meaning of Memory Kernel in Generalized Langevin equation? As I am not a physicist I have no sense to this concept and I need more simple description.
Thanks a lot
Relevant answer
Answer
Memory kernels are characteristic of non-Markovian systems. Physically this means that knowledge of the state of the system at time t is insufficient to determine its evolution from t to t+dt, and knowledge of some history before t is also needed. Mathematically, Markovian systems are described by stochastic differential equations, whereas non-Markovian ones by stochastic integral equations with "memory kernels".
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
5 answers
Hi everybody, Something has occupied my mind these days that what is the importance of time reversal breaking in condensed matter physics, e.g. in Haldane model, which is my new research field. I appreciate anyone who answer me conceptually and in exact word but however in simple word.
Thanks
Relevant answer
Answer
I will second Stam Nicolis here, since he gave a good answer.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
4 answers
An electron is in the state l=0,ms=1/2 when the x-component of its magnetic moment is measured.What values may be obtained &with what probabilities?
What about the z-component of its magnetic moment?
Relevant answer
Answer
Thanks
Behnam Farid
& Spiros Konstantogiannis for the insights.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
121 answers
Heisenberg uncertainty principle was initially proposed for position-momentum conjugate pair. It states that the concurrent precise measurements of position and momentum of a subatomic particle are not possible. This idea has been extended to another pair of quantities, time and energy, without proper justification. Therefore, there has been an endless debate on the validity of the uncertainty concept for the second pair, such as:
· Can time be considered as an observable quantity?
· Are these variables dynamically conjugate, both in classical and in quantum mechanics?
· Does this pair exhibit similar principle as the position-momentum?
· The mathematics of the uncertainty of energy-time pair is not well defined as standard deviation of time does not make sense.
Furthermore, if a certain duration of time is necessary for the accurate measurement of some quantity like energy then we should consider it for momentum too. However, in the latter case, it has been accepted during the history of uncertainty principle, that the measurement of the momentum of any particle can be taken with an arbitrary accuracy irrespective of the duration of the measurement.
If momentum should be treated like energy then it is better to separate Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle from the inevitable measurement inaccuracy of some physical quantities within short interval, which is well understood in science. They seem to be completely different issues, which are kept under the same title.
Relevant answer
Answer
Moreover, it can be defined as there is uncertainty in measuring the variable of the particle. According to the uncertainty principle, if the position is known then the momentum is more uncertain and vice versa. See the link: https://byjus.com/jee-questions/what-is-uncertain-in-uncertainty-principle/
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
3 answers
Actually more constraints...
The discovery of the mysterious He-2-4 nucleus and its geometry enabled me to calculate its mass accurately in 2 parity ways..
Using some logic I hit He-2-4 only to know its mysterious properties known but not taught much: (0) Most Symmetric, (1) Most Abundant, (2) Most Stable, and (3) Mother Nuclei to rest except Hydrogen.
A Geometric Model Satisfying.. (1) Quark, (2) QCD, (3) Yukawa Strong Force Quanta of 200 or 204 Electrons. (4) Thompson Problem of equidistribution charges, (5) CCP Packing of Energy or Mass in the most efficient way in Nature which makes sense for Nucleus, (6) Satisfying Vector Equilibrium Model, and showing evidence of Gravity Gradient Through Density.
Enabling: Leading Through Accurate Calculations it 2 Parity Steps with 99% Accuracy
Dear Friends, I feel obliged to share this with you as some of you wanted me to share. This is a very mystical experience to me, as it is not me but some transcendental revelation. Many discoverers have experienced this. When I re-read the paper, I get shudders and goosebumps.
Please read my paper on He-2-4 to understand the Geometry of the nucleus, which is the mother nucleus for the rest of nuclei along with the father Hydrogen. The first compound to be synthesized in the Universe is HeH (Helium Hydride) as found out. It is one of the most read scientific papers on Research Gate with 1050reads ( along some more reads in another version of the paper) and with 3 Recommendations. Reads for such an esoteric subject are rare. It often stands out as the "Most-Read" status and for 2017 to 2018 it held this record.
In 2008, I hit upon a connection between Photon and Electron/Positron without violating any laws of Physics except one experiment which is the most famous failed experiment. e.g, Michelson Morely. Then in 2010, trying to fit my theory in Strong/Nuclear Force, I hit this mysterious nucleus which we are not taught about. It took me till 2017 to get the geometry and calculations for its mass right.
My theory is nothing but 3 Orthogonal Fields shown in most of the EMF and QM experiments in Physics: where Electric, Magnetic, and Space are orthogonal fields. Unfortunately, we take (Vaccum of) Space to be granted and fail to understand that it is a Field with Supra Super Fluidity (it is like the Ghost passing through you without you feeling it, like in the case of millions of Neutrinos passing through you and one not feeling them but in the Yogic path you could wake up to this field). Some of you have seen my yogic trick of temporarily increasing the size of my fingers or toes by meditation but the second part of the experiment demonstrates that Space is a dynamic Supra Super-Fluid Field.
I was only encouraged to publish the paper when I found I was using the same units as Yukawa used, who was the first Noble Prize Winner for the Strong Force. His approach was more complex modified Dirac Equations but mine was a simple argument, that Nature would reuse components previously built in its walk of the Stack of Reality. The same arguments I used that Electron and Positron are 3D-vortexes weaved using Photons (in Space-Time constraints).
Like Crystal Molecules having Geometric Structure, the nuclei have it too. Modern Physics can't give us a simple picture of the nuclei.
He-2-4 nucleus is the most Symmetric, the most Abundant, the most Stable and tries to satisfy Quark and QCD models. It uses Yukawa's unit of the strength of 200 Electrons Mass (actually 204), the Packing of Spheres Problem (for most efficiently packing mass per unit of volume, which makes sense for a nucleus) for the inner layer, and the Thompson Problem (of distributing 'n' charges in Space for minimal energy or entropy needed for stability) for the outer layer. Then gradient of Gravity is seen (which justifies using Space as Field). e.g., gravity decreases with the increase in the altitude and lighter-dense things float up, while heavy-denser things float down.
The Noble gases are not only stable because of 8 electrons in their orbit (except He, in which case it is 2), but the Noble nuclei are stable with the quanta in units of He-2-4 (which is not taught). The corollary is that a skyscraper is not stable because the top floor is stable but the ground foundation is also needed to be stable.
It also satisfies the Equal Partition Theorem and the Principle of Reuse/Recycle by Nature, which Modern Physics does not use. It uses Muon and Anti Muon as building blocks - the next higher energy/mass resonance of Electron and Positron.
It proposes uses of a Space Field which can be called Dark Energy, Higgs Field, Ether, Prana or Chi. It uses Equivalence Energy Principle to see how much Electro Static Energy will be required to hold the cluster of 12 Nodes and 6 Nodes in the next layer.
There are two parity ways in which the mass of the nucleus is calculated to the accuracy of 99% (variation will happen based on speeds of the nucleus and secondary effects). In complex calculations, we match results up to all digits in two different paths! The baffling part is that all complex vector and energy operations in two different paths lead to the same result while satisfying all constraints!!!
It also demonstrates the Gravity at works at this fundamental level (which is mentioned in another paper).
Relevant answer
Answer
Dirac was one of the great of all time
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
4 answers
The best approach to this question would be Energy to Matter; with the help of a Feynman diagram, the probability for pair production could be calculated. In Quantum Physics, it would be either 0 or 1. If it turns out to be 0, means; answer is No. If it is 1, the answer is yes. This is the most important question at the moment as it has consequences across diverse and disparate disciplines with many of us are associated with.
Relevant answer
Answer
I was just going through the latest progress made by RIEKN and CERN collaboration. In Standard model, under CPT; which ignores influence of gravitational field, there is continued effort to go for higher precision to measure q/m for anti-proton to proton. This quantity is approaching to 0, still it is not zero. It is a small but finite quantity. Is any one aware of a real situation when anti - proton interacts with a proton by direct collision? In case of AD, direct collision is not possible because of prions and other proteins involved in cellular signaling.
One should also note that the conservation laws are based on symmetry elements. In addition to this, there is a concept called spontaneous symmetry breaking.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
6 answers
I'm not an expert in quantum mechanics, but I've come across misconceptions being exposed in the media. Have you ever found misconceptions about quantum mechanics? Could this type of distorted information harm the teaching and learning of such complex concepts?
Relevant answer
Answer
A fantastic case of such misuse I once watched on the Discovery channel.
Firstly, there was Prof. John Rarity, a serious and well known English experimental physicist. He was showing and explaining a lovely experiment on "quantum nonlocality". Details aside, there were two polarization filters, with a light beam emerging from each. From time to time, both beams changed direction. J.R. explained that the fact that beams change direction simultaneously is a manifestation of entanglement of the beams incident on the filters. This effect is only possible in quantum mechanics. Any theory based on "hidden variables" would predict random switching of the beams independent of each other. For an eye of a professional, important was that the beams changed direction not strictly simultaneously, but with a minor random delay, as a manifestation of imperfections characteristic of any real experiment (as opposed to a possible computer-controlled imitation).
After the footage with J.R., the screen was occupied by some hair-brained guy, who enlightened the viewers on the historical fact that quantum physics had finally found an explanation for telepathy, teleportation and other long unexplained nonlocal phenomena. I omit further comments.
The funniest part of the story was that I once had a discussion with J.R. on the common misuse of the term "nonlocality" after his talk. His defense was that we all know that "quantum nonlocality" is only a catchy term for some kind of specifically quantum correlation, that the standard reservation that "quantum nonlocality cannot be used to transfer information" had been made in his talk (true), and that, last but nor least, by using the word "nonlocality", he hoped to get his paper published in PRL instead of J.Phys.B.
At that time, I wholeheartedly agreed with the last sentiment. After that footage on Discovery, I am not quite that sure.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
28 answers
I would like to do work on quantum gravity. But general relativity is not complete. So if i want to do work on GRT. I am beginner for this course. GRT fails in few aspects. Any one suggest me research papers. Please send me your answers.
Relevant answer
Answer
Today I read a quote from Einstein (1934) that the properties of all the basic fields (universal “back ground” fields) represent the properties of space itself. I was a bit flabbergasted because it was Einstein in 1920 who stated that the theory of general relativity (gravitation) don’t exist in a universe without matter. A concept that was proved in 2011 by Eric Verlinde (emergent Newtonian gravity).
The consequence of an emergent force field is the absence of an “independent” field structure that is only dedicated to this force field. It means that gravity – no matter if it is GR or Newtonian gravity – is mediated by one of the existing universal “back ground” fields. In other words, at the moment matter is created in the universe there emerges a field we have termed “gravitation” and it is mediated by the Higgs field, the electric field or the magnetic field.
The exchange of energy between decreased scalars of the Higgs field and the local electric field is determined by Planck’s constant (the Higgs mechanism). But the magnetic field is a vector field and cannot exchange energy. A vector field only determines the direction of the transfer of energy. That is why the electric field and the magnetic field are corresponding fields. The electric field generates a local quantum and the local quantum creates a vector within the magnetic field and visa versa. The duration between the start of the increase of the local energy – the beginning of the flow of a fixed amount of energy – and the moment the quantum has the energy of Planck’s constant is termed “quantum time”. Thus quantum time is a constant.
But if the field of gravitation is mediated by one or two of these universal fields the “holy grail” of quantum gravity already exists. Because we know the properties of these universal fields.
If Einstein’s curved spacetime is mediated by the magnetic field GR is equal to Newtonian gravity but space isn’t curved at all (because the curvature of space represents nothing more than the magnitudes of the vectors).
If GR is mediated by the electric field curved space is not a real curvature but a resultant “curvature” because the electric field is a topological field with a discreet structure that is responsible for the creation of quanta, the fixed amounts of energy (Planck's constant).
The last possibility is the Higgs field. Unfortunately the Higgs field is nearly totally flat in the whole universe (vacuum space). Only rest mass itself forces scalars of the flat Higgs field to decrease their magnitude. Therefore it is impossible that space itself is curved like GR predicts.
The main law in physics – the law of conservation of energy – is restricted to the electric field if there exists no matter in the universe. The consequence is that all the vectors of the corresponding magnetic field in the universe are conserved too (a more fundamental conservation law than the conservation of momentum because momentum is directly related to detectable phenomena). So if matter is created in the universe a new situation is born. The decreased scalar(s) of the Higgs field doesn’t exchange vectors but at the same moment the force of gravitation emerges. The only sensible solution to this problem is that the force of gravitation is equal to the “lost” vectors of the magnetic field because the total amount of vectors in the universe is conserved. So at the end Newton was right although the vectors of the force of gravitation are influencing matter as a push force.
With kind regards, Sydney
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
4 answers
Generally, when we calculate the carrier density in 2DEG from SdH oscillations (Field dependence of sheet resistance) and QHE (field dependence of Hall resistance) it should match. In some cases it was found that carrier density calculated using both data differ. What is the reason behind this difference? What is the physics behind the calculation of carrier density from SdH oscillations and Hall resistance data?
Relevant answer
Answer
It is because SdH oscillation can only occur for those carriers with sufficiently high mobility, whereas in a Hall measurement all carriers are taken into account. So, in cases where transport happens through multi carriers with both high and low mobilities, you may notice such a difference in the value of carrier density obtained from these two measurements.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
4 answers
It is well known that for a closed shell (all electrons are paired up) molecule, the HOMO-LUMO gap is related to its stability. However, I often see that the same argument is used for open-shell systems (Unrestricted calculation). In such a case, the authors consider energies of both alpha and beta spin orbitals, and the orbital with the highest energy is considered as SOMO. Similarly, the LUMO is decided among both alpha and beta, and the respective gap is considered as the SOMO-LUMO gap. Next, the authors discuss the stability of the system based on that value.
However, to the best of my understanding, for an unrestricted calculation, three SOMO-LUMO gaps can be calculated (1) Gap between alpha spin HOMO and alpha spin LUMO (2) Gap between beta spin HOMO and beta spin LUMO, and (3). The method I mentioned above (considering both alpha and beta).
So, my questions are the following,
a) Is it technically correct to relate stability with the SOMO-LUMO gap calculated by method 3 for an open-shell system? Is it even possible to draw such a relation? How correct are such value and such correlation? If yes, then is there any reason why we are ignoring the other two gaps?
b) Are the gaps obtained by an unrestricted calculation have any practical significance at all (As argued here: https://joaquinbarroso.com/2018/09/27/the-homo-lumo-gap-in-open-shell-calculations-meaningful-or-meaningless/)
Any insightful response will be welcome. Thank you in advance.
Relevant answer
Answer
The precise role of UV exposure time in controlling the orbital transition energies, optical and electrical parameters of thermally vacuum evaporated Se 50 Te 50 thin film
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
16 answers
The Editors of Reports on Progress in Physics have chosen to keep their readers in the dark rather than dealing with the physical evidence , as presented in the following Comment they rejected:
We would like to comment on your article “Entanglement: quantum or classical?”, published 26 May 2020, in Reports on Progress in Physics, Volume 83, Number 6, by Dilip Paneru et al., 2020, Rep. Prog. Phys. 83 064001.
That review article was rather misleading because real progress has been made in disproving and rebutting the concept of quantum nonlocality which is the underlying theme of your article mentioned above.
The following references, unambiguously and comprehensively, disprove and rebut the physically meaningless concept of remote quantum collapse or nonlocality of the global wavefunction of “entangled“ states, in general, and in the context of photonic systems, in particular:
1. Robert B. Griffiths, “Nonlocality claims are inconsistent with Hilbert -space quantum mechanics”, Phys. Rev. A 101, 022117 – Published 28 February 2020.
2. F. J. Tipler, "Quantum nonlocality does not exist", PNAS 111 (31), 11281-11286, August 5, 2014;
3. A. Vatarescu, “The Scattering and Disappearance of Entangled Photons in a Homogeneous Dielectric Medium”, Rochester Conference on Coherence and Quantum Optics (CQO-11),
4. S. Boughn, “Making Sense of Bell’s Theorem and Quantum Nonlocality”, Found. Phys., 47, 640-657 (2017)
5. A. Khrennikov, “Get Rid of Nonlocality from Quantum Physics “, Entropy, 2019, 21, 806
6. M. Kupczynski, “Closing the Door on Quantum Nonlocality “, Entropy, 2018, 20, 877.
Consequently, the readers of IOP Reports on Progress in Physics should be informed that your article does not present an objective and true picture of the state of knowledge and understanding of the alleged quantum nonlocality.
Relevant answer
Answer
@All
Please discuss the importance of wave function and energy level on entropy and followed by non- locality .
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
13 answers
Does anyone know of applications of multiple sums of a sequence?
I know of the Multiple Zeta values (which is a multiple sum of 1/N^s). This has multiple applications in quantum physics, QED, QCD, connection between knot theory and quantum physics, ...
Does anyone know of potential applications for this more general form which is a general multiple sums? I have written an article about it and about its applications including partition identities, polynomial identities. I wanted to know if anyone know of applications outside mathematics or additional applications in math.
Relevant answer
Answer
Thank you for your recommendations.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
7 answers
we want to calculate the quantum yield?
Relevant answer
Answer
I think this calculator link is useful to calculate Quantum Yield
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
18 answers
If we think we can observe that the same quantum particle can be simultaneously in different places, so maybe that made these places are only one: a track for a holographic theory of Universe?
Relevant answer
Answer
Your profile shows “that each particle of the Universe contains all the laws governing it as the image of the alive cell containing in its core all genetic information to be it living respective.”
I suppose this is the concept you want to discuss in relation to the holographic universe. But I don’t think it is reasonable to propose that one experiment (QM) can create certainty. Moreover, there are also indications that our universe is a self generating fractal and probably there are other similarities that are convincing too (like the topological property of space).
Anyway, there are 2 well known types of theoretical physics that show a relation with your concept. The first one is quantum field theory because the general concept of QFT is that the underlying structure of the basic quantum fields creates all the observable phenomena. That means that every point in space can “display” all the known physical conditions (that have the same size in space as the imaginary “point”). See Art Hobson (2013). "There are no particles, there are only fields" (https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1204/1204.4616.pd)
The second one is the search for the properties of discrete space (the search for quantum gravity). This concept even underlies QFT because it is hypothesized that the structure of space itself creates not only the observable phenomena but also the basic quantum fields. There is an easy to understand YouTube video about the research (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRyo_ee2r0U). The speaker is one of the leading researchers in the field (Renate Loll).
Unfortunately there is a draw back. Most of the involved theorists are convinced that space is really curved. So they don’t interpret the gravitation of General Relativity as a model but they belief that curved spacetime is real. The consequence is the search for forced mathematical solutions like the Ricci scalar curvature (Riemannian geometry). But the Ricci scalar doesn’t reflect the physical properties of the scalars of the Higgs field. So don’t expect a "ready to use" hypothesis.
With kind regards, Sydney
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
11 answers
The special Issue "Fibonacci and Lucas Numbers and the Golden Ratio in Physics and Biology"
is intended to be a repository for this question.
Apart from this opportunity to publish new results, I am much interested to have unsuspected answers about this subject.
Relevant answer
Answer
It is very importent because everything in the universe is formed within the framework of rules. There is also a golden ratio in these rules.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
6 answers
We know that these principles apply to particles. How is it used in magnetic field now?...
Relevant answer
Answer
Magnetic field is quantized in superconductors, because the superconducting current in any loop containing magnetic field (or no magnetic field) is described by a wave-function that has to have a whole number of cycles in a loop, and the phase slope is proportional to current, I think.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
6 answers
Explain exactly what the detector does and if the choice of detector affects the outcome.
Einstein and Bohr had some discussions on this. What's the current situation?
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear I Chavdarovski,
Whenever you want to detect which slit the photon or electron is passing through, you loose the double slit interference pattern.
This is the same statement as before.
Whatever detector you use, once the photon or electron is detected by the detector , the original path or the propagation is lost and the pattern vanishes.
Thanks
N Das
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
20 answers
How does one combine the basis of Quantum Physics that the information cannot be destroyed with the GR statement that black holes destroy the info?
Relevant answer
Answer
Indeed, some of these topics are open: they are connected with the theory of quantum gravity, yet to be constructed (string theory and holography, with the AdS/CFT correspondence, or loop quantum gravity are only attempts).
However, I think that the "black hole information paradox" is surrounded by too much hype. The reason is, of course, the attraction of Hawking's public figure and his wager. There was much theatre in Hawking's conceding that black hole evaporation in fact preserves information.
The paradox arises because the initial matter configuration is assumed to be constructed as a pure quantum state. As I have already remarked, this is unphysical. The article in Wikipedia about the "black hole information paradox" cites Penrose saying that the loss of unitarity in quantum systems is not a problem and that quantum systems do not evolve unitarily as soon as gravitation comes into play. This is most patent in theories of cosmological inflation.
Of course, the definitive answer to Natalia S Duxbury's question will come with the final theory of quantum gravity. We can keep looking forward to it :-)
Best wishes to the seekers of final theories!
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
15 answers
In everyday speech, chaos means disorder, crowd, unpredictability, etc. In philosophy, chaos is used in the terms of pro-matter, primordial space, that is, what became before order was brought into our world. In psychology, the word chaos raises fears that order will disappear and disorder will reign again. Chaos is a new field of science, but also a new way of observing the world. So, for physicists, engineers, economists, doctors, biologists, sociologist, psychologists, psychiatrists etc., chaos means an incentive to re-examine their equations, data, knowledge and beliefs. Chaos enabled a systematic approach to phenomena and systems of great internal complexity as well as an understanding of seemingly extremely simple phenomena. Many (but not all) scientists agree that after the theory of relativity and quantum physics, chaos is the third scientific revolution.Is theory of chaos the third scientific revolution?
Relevant answer
Answer
To Moshe Ofer,
Thank you for sharing this items.
Kind regardas
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
5 answers
We know that for Spin-1/2 particles, we can find the Creation and Annihilation operators from the Spin operators by using Jordan–Wigner transformation and also for Spin-1 particles, we can utilise Holstein-Primakoff transformations for mapping bosonic Creation and Annihilation operators to the Spin operators. But suppose if we need to find the same relationship for Spin-3/2 or Spin-2 particles or other higher spin particles, then how can we approach to it?
I will be highly grateful if someone kindly clarifies my doubt.
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Rajdeep Tah!
As far as I understood, you wish to canonicaly quantize spin-3/2 and spin-2 irreducible representations of Poincare group, that is to find creation and annihilation operators for Rarita-Schwinger and Fierz-Pauli hamiltonians respectively.
For spin-2 you may find corresponding operators in https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.03704
Please, tell me if this helps
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
93 answers
Imagine two fermion wave-packets of Gaussian form, whose paths cross one another, see figure. The blue circles represent the two wave-packets at different times. At a certain time the wave-packets coincide.
Assume that the fermions are identically polarized and the two wave-packets |ψ>A and |ψ>B travel with the same group-velocity along the axis z, vA,z = vB,z = vz. In addition, assume that the transversal group-velocities are opposite, vA,﬩ = -vB,﬩ = v.
What happens in the region where the wave-packets coincide?
Recall that identical fermions cannot occupy the same cell in the phase space. Recall also that for Gaussian wave-packets ΔP Δr = ħ, where ΔP is the width of the distribution of the linear momentum.
It seems to me that the two wave-packets should "run away" from the region of overlapping. But how? For changing the group-velocity of the wave-packet a force is required. No force is acting here, the two wave-packets propagate in free space.
Relevant answer
Answer
The assumption of a trajectory is misleading. What is real is: two fermions are emitted at A and B, and two fermions are detected at D1 and D2. I also notice that there is an implicit assumption of no-interaction between the fermions. So, the important question is: what is the probability of detection at D1 and D2? As a matter of fact, there are 3 possibilities: two fermions at D1, two fermions at D2, and one at D1 and another at D2, since they are indistinguishable. What QM tells us is that the fact that they are fermions will lead to anticorrelations in the detections. That is actually an example of the Hanbury Brown and Twiss effect. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanbury_Brown_and_Twiss_effect )
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
17 answers
I am stuck between Quantum mechanics and General relativity. The mind consuming scientific humor ranging from continuous and deterministic to probabilistic seems with no end. I would appreciate anyone for the words which can help me understand at least a bit, with relevance.
Thank you,
Regards,
Ayaz
Relevant answer
Answer
I suspect that the reason you struggle with quantum mechanics is because of quantum foundations, which are the most interesting and intractable problems in quantum mechanics. You can read an overview here.
Here is an overview of the difficulties in devising a theory of quantum gravity.
The most successful attempt at quantum gravity is superstring theory. Here is a good introduction.
If you have further questions, you can email me at jeffery_winkler@mail.com
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
6 answers
Do you think then that there is a universality of this particular ratio?
I, for my part, highlighted this ratio in these different areas:
Relevant answer
Answer
The most famous ratio is the golden value. Anyway, this value generated by the famous Fibonacci recurrence Fn+1 = Fn + Fn-1 ,
{0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,....} Fibonacci numbers
that is
lim Fn+1 / Fn = the golden value = (1 +sqrt5)/2
Also, one can see that the following sequence of numbers
Gn+1 = 4Gn - 3Gn-1
{ o,1, 4, 13, 40,....}
converges to the value 3/2,
that is lim Gn+1 / Gn = 3/2
I hope you can connect this sequence with your observations in nature and science.
Regards
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
9 answers
I have tried to study quantum mechanics before but never understood it. After learning basics about quantum computing and quantum information including quantum hardware and qubit types, I wish to start studying quantum physics again. What are few of the areas of quantum mechanics that Quantum information systems relate or are based on?
Relevant answer
Answer
The Mathematical framework of Quantum information theory carries over to address the issue of dynamics of nuclear spin ensembles ,e.g the NMR spectroscopy or MRI , nmr spin systems were one of the earliest candidates for scalable quantum computers.
In my opinion the concepts of Quantum information theory do not only relate to quantum mechanics but provide a great impetus for research on Linear algebra, Matrix theory , Multivariate statistics and Matrix Calculus of real and complex variables.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
123 answers
The very common experiment in optics to demonstrate that light behaves same as the wave is single-slit diffraction.
If we assume that the thickness of the barriers is 0.1 mm, then the length of a slot along the optical axis will be a long route as a green photon will measure it nearly two hundred times larger than its own size.
Now the question is how the photon behaves along with that long route? Does it behave as a particle or wave? If the exit of the slot or a pinhole is causing photon behaves as a wave then why the entrance wouldn't do that? And if we accept that photon behaves like a wave as it enters the single slit or the pinhole, then formally we should apply the Fresnel diffraction equation from the entry of the slot that will lead us to nowhere.
In my opinion, wave-particle duality is leading us solely to some useful approximation but it doesn't talk about reality, as it cannot explain a sort of experiments that unfortunately have been ignored or left behind such as the glory of the shadow, and also the stretching the shadows when they meet each other and so on.
For sure, wave-particle duality is not the end of science and for sure five hundred years later people will not consider the existence as do we do now the same as us that we don't see the things same as our ancestors, so we should be open-minded to be able to open the new horizons.
Relevant answer
Answer
Natalia S Duxbury > “Particle is a real physical object. But what is the wave made of???? Wave function is a mathematical construction”.
Very well said, could not agree more! Theoretical physics for the last (more than) hundred years and specially since Albert Einstein has been an enormous waste in terms of human, natural and economic resources and most of all at the heavy cost of intellectual advance of humanity.
The truth is that formally trained modern theoretical physicists unwittingly follow a philosophy/epistemology (a branch of knowledge that they routinely disparage!), namely Kantianism that has already been discredited long ago by G.W.F. Hegel, the worthy protégé of Kant himself! Modern theoretical “physicists” - following Einstein, are not concerned with knowing objective reality as it is in-itself (ontology), but only with the subjective data (epistemology) they can gather about it; so in actual sense they are trying to understand the working of their own minds, rather than external reality!
The Kantian premise is that objective reality is a messy, chaotic, unwieldy and unknowable thing-in-itself; because it does not follow the pristine precincts of good old commonsense, causality, formal logic and the notions of rationality that have been developed by philosophers starting from the early Greeks. The only thing man can do (Kant posited) is to use his sense perceptions, experimental data, his thought, imagination, fantasy or whatever subjective data he can gather about the objective reality to get on with life. What man at best can do, is to organize this data through his subjective thought, mental tools, logical schemata, mathematical (geometrical, algebraic, symmetry) structures and representations, logical categories, theories etc. to get as much of an “understanding” of objective reality as possible, to deal with it comfortably! A good theory is the one that can cover as much of this data, as well as future possible ones (predictability). This is what is historically known as scholasticism - an endless debate to justify one's subjective choice from various theories; but there is no way to judge who is right, except the power of individual’s proficiency in debating skills!
After the quantum phenomena, the Kantian view of the world became a "self-evident truth" for natural science, if there was any doubt about it before, at all. Theoretical physics led by Albert Einstein embraced the Kantian view of the world whole heartedly and universally and like Moses led an Exodus of the physicists to the promised land of thought and mathematics - his "Castle in the Air", as we see now. According to the Kantian view, objective reality is like an invisible Cheshire cat, which remains unknown, we only deal with the “smile” of the cat that we can perceive through our sense perceptions and process through our subjective mental tools.
From a materialist dialectical world view (that I subscribe to) the quantum phenomena is the most fundamental aspect of objective reality, which abolishes “spacetime” or any other esoteric “fields". All forces are mediated by the exchange of virtual particles. The virtual particles become real particles if enough energy equivalence of their mass is available. Light at all wavelengths are particles that can propagate as wave. Please see the following articles and other related publications, questions and comments in my RG profile:
Ambartsumian, Arp and the Breeding Galaxies:
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
6 answers
Whitehead's "Process and Reality" dates from 1929.
In it, he argues – among many other things – that "It has been a defect in modern philosophies that they throw no light whatever on any scientific principle." (Pt.2, §IV, IV).
Does his own philosophy ("the philosophy of the organism") stand up to that requirement when confronted with contemporary scientific knowledge?
Relevant answer
Answer
I follow what you are saying. And what you are saying actually fits with some of the models of the big bang. For example, Stephen Hawking says that quantum models suggest that, in the very early stages of the big bang, there was no dimension of time, which is why even quantum theory cannot tell us what that state before time means.
As you say, such a state would be timeless. That is why quantum theory cannot tell us what that could mean.
However, one thing to remember here is that the term "spacetime" is not referring to time in the usual sense. Whitehead was aware of this.
More recently, a physicist and philosopher who has published a new interpretation of quantum mechanics, Ruth Kastner, describes spacetime as stitched together events created by exchanges of energy. This is very close to what Whitehead was describing.
I have also developed a model where time emerges from entangled relationships, and where space emerges from a different type of relationship. Then, spacetime, which is actually a physical state and is something different, emerges from exchanges of energy, as Kastner describes. I spoke with Kastner and she agreed that my model is consistent with hers, if both time and space were purely quantum states.
Here is how to picture the idea that time can emerge from relationships: If we have a personal relationship with another person, we can become so involved that we lose all sense of time outside of the relationship. However, relationships are never static, especially when they are truly alive. The experience of relationships changing clearly gives us a sense of time. However, that sense of time only belongs to the relationship. It doesn't apply to anything else. So, it isn't time in general, but really just what we might call relationship time.
In this case, we can talk about what exists before relationship time by simply saying that, before that specific relationship, relationship time did not exist.
So the type of time we are talking about matters.
Back to the point you were making. I agree that the idea of a state before "time" doesn't make sense. In this case "time" means the general idea of time itself. However, spacetime is not the same thing. Spacetime is a specific state of physical reality that does not represent all of time or all of space, but only specific events composed of transfers of energy.
For example, relationship time is not included in spacetime because relationship time is personal and only belongs to those who are involved in the relationship. Relationship time does not exist for outsiders.
This might all sound strange, but a recent experiment has verified that quantum entanglement is indeed a source for time that is shared only between entangled particles. That time does not exist to outside observers.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
2 answers
The two versions have reached 1100 Reads.
The first paper, "The Walk of Reality - He-2-4 Nucleus Model" went on to be the Most Read Status since Aug 2017 till April 2019. I have periodically shared this in my past posts.
The He-2-4 Nucleus is not listed in the Periodic Table but the most important one to understand Nature and Creation. It is the (1) Most Symmetric, (2) Most Stable, (3) Most Abundant, and (4) Mother Nuclei to all the rest of Nuclei, except Hydrogen. It also satisfies QCD and Quark Models. In its composition uses 204 Electron Mass Quanta, same as what Fukuma, the first Noble Prize Winner for Strong Force, derived but I came to know it later after I used the same unit. My argument was Nature would like to reuse its previous build particles, I chose Muons. It also satisfies Nature's HCP Packing of Max Mass/Energy per Volume, which made sense for an ideal nucleus.
I hit this special nucleus in 2010 using my arguments on 3 Fields symmetries in 3D space, and trying to satisfy Quark and QCD models.
Relevant answer
Answer
Hans, Thanks. I had seen this paper before. Will read again.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
2484 answers
There exist   theoretical evidences that this hipothesis is true, especially, it is strongly supported by the Casimir type electron stability mechanism suggested by Prof. Hal Puthoff in his nice work: Puthoff H.E. "Casimir vacuum energy and the semicalssical electron". Int J Theor Phys, 46, 2007, p. 3005-3008, as well as in the works by Valerii B Morozov,  2011 Phys.-Usp. 54 371 doi:10.3367/UFNe.0181.201104c.0389
"On the question of the electromagnetic momentum of a charged body",
Rohrlich F. Self-Energy and Stability of the Classical Electron. American Journal of Physics, 28(7), 1960, p. 639-643,
Prykarpatsky A.K., Bogolubov N.N. (Jr.) On the classical Maxwell-Lorentz electrodynamics, the inertia problem and the Feynman proper time paradigm. Ukr. J. Phys. 2016, Vol. 61, No. 3, p. 187-212
and by Rodrigo Medina in the work "Radiation reaction of a classical quasi-rigid extended
particle", J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 39 (2006) 3801–3816 doi:10.1088/0305-4470/39/14/021
The last one is very learning and also solves the well known "4/3"-problem formulated by Abraham,  Lorentz and Dirac more than 100 years ago.
Relevant answer
Answer
I'm happy you' re talking about logic. This word triggers lots of associations: first of all, they are Gödel's incompleteness theorems; and related to it consepts of intuitionism; truth which cannot be equated with provability in any effectively axiomatizable theory; logicism of course :) and so on.
We all know that there is no exact and right answer to this question ("Is the electron mass strictly of electromagnetic origin?"). Even your reasoning and formulas are based on assumptions that are not undisputed.
But you have a "unique" logic - your views are your arguments and you equate your beliefs with the truth.
Well, you have the right to do that. But please, do it more polite and less insistent, because we also have the right to disagree with you.
For me electronics is much more important than the considerations the purpose of which, as far as I understand, is to make a list of permissions who should talk and about what.
Although I believe it will be difficult to make this list as well, because the contradiction often comes to the forefront. For example, in one answer, you tell to Abdelhalim abdelnaby Zekry "I criticize you and electronics both."
And in another, you say: "I don't criticize persons." So, the question remains, will this list include only ideas or people with them, too?
Finally, one question, and one request:
Question: You wrote "Wrong is wrong." Yes, also "a table is a table," "a window is a window" and in general by the law of identity "a is a". What of it follows in the framework of of this discussion?
Request: you wrote: People should not identify themselves with wrong ideas and should not believe on the myth of science as the last myth.
Please let people identify themselves with whom or what they want and believe in what they want. This is more important than scientific beliefs or even achievements. I believe the essence of scientific discussion is in facts and arguments, not in taboos.
Regards,
Dimitri
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
13 answers
Let's talk about what is our self else than your memories (if all set of information that we've got is a different type of memories)?
Relevant answer
Answer
The self is a complex interaction between memory and attention. In this case memory is facts we know about ourselves (self-knowledge), schematic structures built from our socio-cultural context and autobiographical memory. The Self is how we appraise, use, and prioritize not only information in memory, but also various interests and desires. These actions on memory, interests, and desires require varying degrees of attentional resources. Carolyn Jennings makes this point much better than I in her essay (https://aeon.co/essays/what-is-the-self-if-not-that-which-pays-attention). In sum, there is a bidirectional relationship between our Self and how we appraise, use, and prioritize what’s stored away in memory structures as well as our management of our interests and desires.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
9 answers
Curious about what level of existence or non-existence (however one may qualify those two terms, or the two listed in the title ('living matter' or 'non-living matter') can collapse the wave function, so as to help research on understanding the "mesocopic" divide between the quantum (microscopic) and classical (macroscopic) realms of physics.
Here are some articles I've ran across/am using for my last paper in my undergraduate work:
Relevant answer
Answer
It has to be a screen that does not take energy from the particles being diffracted. If it does take any energy then the pattern is lost. In that case it is also possible to tell which slit a particle went through (because you can in principle detect where the energy appears). When the screen is massive enough then no energy exchange occurs - like an elastic ball bouncing from the earth.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
29 answers
The diffraction of light has been referred to as its wave quality since it seemed there was no other solution to describe that phenomenon as its particle quality and subsequently, it exhibited wave-particle duality.
Relevant answer
Answer
Berndt Barkholz Similarly, I would say electrons cannot be particles too, because they behave like photons in many experiments, such as double slit experiment.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
2 answers
I want to overlap the Cs atom with a nanofiber. I am using two cameras but it is still not clear. So I added an external coil to AH coils to move them flexibly. Now the issue is how to minimize the external magnetic field!!!
Relevant answer
Answer
Yes, we have H coils in three directions. However, minimizing the external magnetic field is manipulated by any change in the frequency shifts of cooling beam and so on.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
2 answers
For instance, both nitride NW-QDs and h-BN point defect based SPEs seem to exhibit photon entanglement. Which platform will provide stronger entanglement?
I suspect, that purity of the single photon that is emitted from either source will determine which source offers the best route for entanglement . Or perhaps I am wrong, i.e. none of these emitters (either based on InGaN QDs or h-BN point defects) producing entangled states. Could anyone of you please share your experience.
Relevant answer
Answer
Entanglement involves more than one photon. For photon emitters it's described by resolving the shot noise distribution of the photons emitted.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
6 answers
When deriving the Hartee-Fock method, we minimize the electronic energy with respect to all molecular orbitals with the constraint of orthonormality of the molecular orbitals by using the method of Lagrange multipliers. Is there a fundamental reason why the molecular orbitals need to be orthogonal? Does it ensure a lower energy compared to any non-orthogonal set of molecular orbitals?
Thank you very much for your help
Relevant answer
Answer
Simply go back to the definition of Hartree-Fock. The idea is to approximate the many-body wave function with a single Slater determinant. Because of the determinant, any non-orthogonal component of the orbitals is irrelevant and only the orthogonal part survives. In other words, if you take a non-orthogonal set of orbitals and construct a Slater determinant out of those, you will get the same determinant if you would have first orthogonalised them (Gram-Schmidt, Löwdin, canonical, etc.). You still have the same volume.
Generally one prefers to work with orthogonal orbitals, since this makes it easier to work out the expectation values of the determinants (e.g. energy) via the Slater-Condon rules. Generalisations also exist for non-orthogonal orbitals, but due to the cross-terms, you get overlap matrices, cofactors and adjugates all over the place. So in this sense, orthonormal orbitals are more a convenience than a necessity. Non-orthogonal orbitals would not add anything (the determinant remains the same).
On the other hand, once you have used the Slater-Condon rules to work out the expectation value of the Hamiltonian, this energy expression is only valid for orthonormal orbitals. So you better enforce orthonormality in the optimisation, to get a physically sensible answer out. (All orbitals could become identical, so all the particles would occupy the same state. So you would get bosons out instead of fermions.)
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
3 answers
as you know, the different studies show that the shell improve the QY of QDs. I want to know that, how the shell could improve the QY of QDs?
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Kambiz,
As the previous comments already pointed out, the surface properties of QDots and other materials with a high surface area give rise to the need of an epitactically grown shell exhbiting a wider band gap (e.g. CdS onto CdSe or ZnS onto CdS). From a chemical point of view, the surface of QDots is terminated by chemical groups with high phonon frequencies such as hydroxide, hydrosulphide, or carbonate, which foster non-radiative quenching of excitons by multi-phonon relaxation. To visualise the process, please have a look to the attached ppt-file.
Yours truly,
Thomas
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
10 answers
Do you think that the recent paper of Aharonov et al. resolved the problem of the long-standings particle-wave duality in Quantum Physics?
Are you aware of more recent works?
"Finally making sense of the double-slit experiment"
Yakir Aharonov, Eliahu Cohen, Fabrizio Colombo, Tomer Landsberger, Irene Sabadini, Daniele C. Struppa, and Jeff Tollaksen PNAS June 20, 2017 114 (25) 6480-6485; first published May 31, 2017 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1704649114
Relevant answer
Answer
Of course there isn't a unique ``interpretation'' of any experiment and it's astonishing, how many people seem to think that the double slit experiment describes quantum mechanics in some sort of way, that other experiments don't.
The interference pattern is the only thing that matters for the double slit experiment. Any method that gives this pattern is as good as any other and any method that doesn't give this pattern is useless.
Incidentally, the standard formulation of quantum mechanics is time symmetric-since it describes unitary evolution and it doesn't make any assumptions about particles or waves, since it doesn't refer to spacetime properties, but phase space properties and there aren't any particles or waves in phase space.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
4 answers
When we consider two particle interaction in a low dimensional semiconducting systems, we include the coulomb interaction between the two particles in the form of (q1*q2)/Mod[r1-r2] in the Hamiltonian. If we solve this Hamiltonian using variational technique, is it necessary to consider the correlation between the two particles in wavefunction also? Can anyone give a clear idea about this?
Relevant answer
Answer
If there isn't any correlation, then the wavefunction of the 2-particle state factorizes into a product-which, by construction, doesn't describe interacting particles.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
4 answers
I'm recently buying some anti-CD3 and anti-CD28 to activate T cells. I also notice some of this clones have been conjugated with fluorescence for the purpose of labeling T cells for flow cytometry.
One thing i'm very interested is that once the conjugated antibody is binding to T cells, they will first activate T cells, which will definitely affect the result of the original T cells status (which is the status you want to check).
It reminds me of quantum physics. If you observe it, you change it.
I'm sure a lot of people never care about the effects of labeling T cells. How to ensure a marker antibody won't affect T cells functions?
Relevant answer
Answer
It is quite possible that the antibody will affect the cells. Usually, they are applied to fixed cells for visualization purposes. On the other hand, for live cell imaging, one could use transient transfection with some fluorescent proteins (if applicable)
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
14 answers
Assuming that particle consists of a photon that moves circularly in the loop, creating standing wave obeying the rule that its closed path 2*Pi*R=n*Lambda (1) (resonator where resonator length 2*Pi*R is „n” times photon wavelength) and knowing particle's mass (experimental value), we can calculate its radius.
Lets put c/v (2) for Lambda in the above equation (1), where v is photon frequency. We get then 2*Pi*R=n*c/v (3). Now if we assume that particle's mass is of EM origin and m=E/c^2 (4) where E=hv (5) is the energy of circulating photon as described above we can rewrite (4) as m=hv/c^2 (6) or v=mc^2/h (7) (letter h stands for Planck constant of course). Now lets put (7) into (3) and we get 2*Pi*R=n*c/(mc^2/h) (8) or simplifying R=n* h/2*Pi*mc (9).
Now, let's take proton for our considerations. Assuming n=4 in eq. (9) and m=1,672621637(83)*10^(-27)kg (experimental value) we can calculate proton's radius to be R=0.84124 fm which stays in agreement with the experimental value of 0.84184 fm +/- 0,00067 fm (the most accurate experimental value measured in a Hydrogen atom with a Muon in 2010).
You can read more about that theory and mechanism in my paper here:
What do You think?
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear
László Attila Horváth
EM origin not fermionic :D
Explain "fermionic".
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
17 answers
. Just uploaded. Physical reality is conceived as being essentially classical and determinate. But due to the limitations of our neurone-based perceptual mechanism, we experience it in terms of three 'perceptual categories': 1) 'classical', where observations don't affect the observed, and our knowledge is certain to within experimental error; 2) 'quantum' where they do, and our knowledge is uncertain; 3) a hypothetical undetectable 'subliminal substrate'. Our overall universe view is then inherently incomplete, and apparent quantum indeterminacy is due to this. Anyone interested in discussing?
Relevant answer
Answer
I must congratulate you to point out philosophy of Quantum Mechanics .Epistemology -The theory of knowledge . METAPHYSICS -A relationship between
Mind & Matter - Just like de-broglies wave particle duality .
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
2 answers
Exploration of various psychic abilities seemed had reached a dead end with the deterministic Newtonian physics. Now, with quantum physics gaining much progression, should psychic abilities be given more consideration to explore more and gain deeper understanding about them?
Relevant answer
Answer
Quite agree with Hans answer, no obvious connection via classical physics.
Nevertheless psychic abilities remains a good topic for
psychologists, paranormal or not, a topic whoes popularity
fluctuates, but of interest never dropping to zero.
The quantum and chemistry are fairly well connected., but you get into a horrible complexity there. Psychiatry and brain chemistry keep advancing of course.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
4 answers
What are Ramanujan's modular functions, what are they for and how do they apply in relativity, quantum physics and string theory? And where can I consult bibliography about it?
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Carlos, I believe he is one of the genius that we had. To my understanding his formula is telling us that infinite does not exist. It can be very large or very small, but it never reach to infinite. Best regard. PS: to read this article well worth it https://www.academia.edu/38185474/Infinite_is_Relative_2_.doc
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
1 answer
OK, I try to bring in words what I like to understand - in a philosophical and mathematical sense ... Assuming that the paradigm "the observer determines (his) reality" is true - as was recently confirmed - I was wondering if there is a physical explanation and/or possibility so switch operators or transform operators into another operator. In the sense - if you have a certain (mental) filter - you see a situation with that bias - you can change your mental filter (if you are lucky) - by an act of "transformative insight" - and "see the world with other eyes". Now - is there a mathematical representation for this when applying an operator to the wavefunction? I know of course to rotate coordinates to have the eigenvalues in a different basis. Can this be somehow used to re-program an operator? Of course staying within the Heisenberg-limit.
Relevant answer
Answer
Perhaps the heart of your question is the relationship between consciousness and spacetime. Relativity depends on consciousness being directly related to the idea of time, which still is quite an assumption without investigating how consciousness is intricately related to time, so the notion of mind connecting with matter (as per spacetime and thus time) is not entirely absurd. Yet in saying that there must be "conditions" that adhere to the logic of physics, which I consider you are seeking to establish.
I considered in "The Conception of Time" that the assumption of time and consciousness being linked needed further investigation:
I did not go into what the mind can impart on reality, yet how the two are linked nonetheless via the "code" of consciousness with time.
I'm not sure if that paper can shed insights into your work, yet the basis of consciousness/mind and "matter" (presumably space-time) are linked in that paper.
It would seem the paper previous to that, "The Physics Chimera", appears to discount the idea of mind over matter, simply because the idea of inertia is considered as the "fault" of physics, the "chimera", in aiming to reach a unified field theory improperly:
On a fundamental scale of course regarding matter and consciousness, in removing the equations of inertia and using purely field equations of time in space, and then relating that consciousness, the "intentionality" of consciousness, to effect a transformative process beyond its sphere of "subjectivity", is rendered useless unless using the notion of time as consciousness as a "field force" concept in a greater context "subjectivity" of consciousness (that greater context touted in "The conception of Time").
Another idea is that if you're a muscle in you're arm and you want to move, you're localising something in you're spacetime environment to entertain that concept, which is relayed to the greater body that muscle of the arm is related to.....yet it has to entertain the idea of an executive (more global/body) consciousness to achieve that, the brain of the body that muscle in the arm is a subset of.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
4 answers
nano devices, nano materials, semiconductor physics, quantum physics, quantum mechanics, quantum wire.
Relevant answer
Answer
In JLFET you don't have any doping. You only have intrinsic semiconductor.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
8 answers
What is the relationship between quantum physics and artificial intelligence?
Relevant answer
Answer
In my knowledge, these topics doesn't interfere since quantum physics interests mainly the hard tools of the calculations (I refer to qbit) but AI concerns the soft part (AI softwares).
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
6 answers
Since J. von Neumann physicists stick to categories of Hilbert spaces to modelize quantum phenomena. Categories of modules over a ring might represent an alternative if we add axioms (e.g. the existence of particular limits or co-limits) that would respond to the experimental requirements.
A very general setting for the purpose would be abelian categories. Have there been attempts to make use of them?
References:
Relevant answer
Answer
Of course it is well known that the category of R-modules is suitable for this setting. Let me add one more reference
"Continuous Geometry" by J von Neumann, Oxford University Press, 1960.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
5 answers
Recently Ive started to learn about quantum chemistry programing. I need some advice about books I need to read and also skills I need to learn.
I have some experiences of working with c++ language and also I am familiar with quantum physic basics.
My major goal is to join to the developers team of Gaussian quantum chemistry software and I need a clear path to reach this goal.
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Hamed
It is a great honor I can see Iranian researchers want to develop some features with Gaussian software, as one of the most appropriate tools in the field of cheminformatics. For reaching your goal, I think it is better you start by learning python programming language. It can support you to quickly get in touch with hundreds of ideas related to Gaussian.
There are many options with python scripts in which you will be able to save your time for further developing of valuable plugins for Gaussian. On the other hand, python will enable you to design new and simplified platforms for optimizing, converting, and minimizing of chemical ligands that only found in Gaussian suite.
Before everything, you should determine a goal for yourself to become a developer of Gaussian. For instance, you can work on ligand optimizing scripts to expedite the speed of related chemical computations. Developing a python script to run an Atom Centered Density Matrix propagation model smoothly may be an exciting job for you based on your experiences in this field.
Like an ocean, Gaussian codes and its algorithms have considerable depth, and for expanding some ideas in this field, you should search for a different corner to mature your hypothesis. By and large, python is an excellent choice for you about the query you discussed in this question.
Kind regards,
HR
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
20 answers
We have learned that they remain in superposition state unless detected. Can anyone elaborate it in theoretical terms?
Relevant answer
Answer
Nonclassical objects with the de Broglie wavelengths too significant to ignore
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
10 answers
Are there any good comprehensive review article on qubits? As in, one that gives a whole summary of all the possible platform and compare their strengths and weaknesses, like trapped ion, superconducting qubits, nuclear spin, quantum dots,etc.
Relevant answer
Answer
You may be interested in water qubits.
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
6 answers
OK, I try to bring in words what I like to understand - in a philosophical and mathematical sense ... Assuming that the paradigm "the observer determines (his) reality" is true - as was recently confirmed - I was wondering if there is a physical explanation and/or possibility so switch operators or transform operators into another operator. In the sense - if you have a certain (mental) filter - you see a situation with that bias - you can change your mental filter (if you are lucky) - by an act of "transformative insight" - and "see the world with other eyes". Now - is there a mathematical representation for this when applying an operator to the wavefunction? I know of course to rotate coordinates to have the eigenvalues in a different basis. Can this be somehow used to re-program an operator? Of course staying within the Heisenberg-limit.
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi Thomas,
you might want to give a look at this paper (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1811.12420.pdf). In particular in Eq. 3 they describe the evolution of a density matrix in presence of a continuous (weak or strong) measurement by the observer. As you can notice, due to the fact that the quantum system is continuously projected in random states provided by the measurment outcome, the density matrix undergoes nonlinear stochastic dynamics. Due to this intrinsically stochastic nature, I am not sure whether this description in the Schrodinger picture can extend to similar formalism in the Heisenberg picture for the operators, but hopefully it will give you some lead!
  • asked a question related to Quantum Physics
Question
9 answers
Like Crystal Molecules Having Geometric Structure. Atom Has It Too.
Modern Physics can't give us a simple picture of the atoms. Please read my paper on He-2-4 to understand the Geometry of the nucleus, which is the mother nucleus for rest of nuclei's along with Father H. It is most Symmetric, most Abundant, most Stable and also satisfies Quark, QCD, Yukawa's unit of strength of 200 Electrons Mass (actually 206), Nature's Packing of Spheres for inner layer and Thompson Problem for outer layer.
It also satisfies the Equi Partition Theorem and the Principle of Reuse/Recycle by Nature, which Modern Physics does not use. It uses Muon and Anti Muon as building blocks.
It proposes uses of a Space Field which can be called Dark Energy, Higgs Field, Ether, Prana or Chi.
It uses Equivalence Energy Principle to see how much Electro Static Energy will be required to hold the cluster of 12 Nodes and 6 Nodes in next layer. There are two ways the mass of the nucleus is calculated to the accuracy of 99%. In complex calculations, we match results up to 4 digits!
It also demonstrates the Gravity at works at this fundamental level but the paper will come later.
It also explains why Noble Gases are stable besides the outer 8 electrons but He-2-4 has only 2? It is because the nucleus is stable and when the Nucleus is not stable, the Weak Force decay happens.
Relevant answer
Answer