100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Quantum Mechanics Introduction | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
What would interest me and perhaps for the majority of us here on Mingle2 is where would one start first on studies before even getting to quantum mechanics? Would one just have to start with basic physics and really have a solid understanding of it before buildling up to quantum mechanics? This questions is posed on everyone who has already posted on this thread concerning the subject. Thank you for the time and effort in answering this for us basic Mingler crowd who have curious minds   Frequently QM is introduced in the 2nd year of University Physics as a "Modern Physics" class. The book by Eisberg I cited previously is a classic for this course. The required background is minimal such that someone with a good high school level science background should be able to work through it. If you look up books on "Modern Physics" at the library you might find you prefer one of the other texts. Go to the library and read! Can't hurt anything... |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
smiless
on
Mon 08/24/09 06:30 PM
|
|
What would interest me and perhaps for the majority of us here on Mingle2 is where would one start first on studies before even getting to quantum mechanics? Would one just have to start with basic physics and really have a solid understanding of it before buildling up to quantum mechanics? This questions is posed on everyone who has already posted on this thread concerning the subject. Thank you for the time and effort in answering this for us basic Mingler crowd who have curious minds Frequently QM is introduced in the 2nd year of University Physics as a "Modern Physics" class. The book by Eisberg I cited previously is a classic for this course. The required background is minimal such that someone with a good high school level science background should be able to work through it. If you look up books on "Modern Physics" at the library you might find you prefer one of the other texts. Go to the library and read! Can't hurt anything... Wow I read so much it isn't funny, but somehow science never pertained to my interest for a very long time. The first 5 pages and I am already yawning! Why is that? Now at this age, which is too late for anything, but for mere curiousity only, I wonder what all the commotion is about with this quantum mechanics. I mean truly what is it used for on a daily bases? Who uses it everyday to go to work? Is it just the scientists dabbling around with numbers or something. This would interest me. Yet thank you for the introductory on Eisberg. I have heard of him, but never sat down to really study his material. Libraries in Miami are full of smelly homeless people dirting the books and making the environment unpleasant. Something I never understood when I moved from Germany. I prefer to buy the books or order them online. Thanks brother for sharing your information. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps I shouldn't have posted this thread. I really wanted to understand this Quantum Mechanics, but in the end it is over my head and will just leave it to the scientists it was worth it just because I like hearing everyone saying QM this and QM that it feels like ya'll are talking about me |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps I shouldn't have posted this thread. I really wanted to understand this Quantum Mechanics, but in the end it is over my head and will just leave it to the scientists it was worth it just because I like hearing everyone saying QM this and QM that it feels like ya'll are talking about me We are. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
shhhh we are talking about QM
Don't let him know
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
try the university library. there are co-eds.
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most quantum functions of any meaning deal with wave functions. Abra uses particles. How in the world did you get that idea from what I wrote? Clearly the problem here has nothing to do with physics but with your reading skills. I never claimed to be treating anything as 'particles'. I was viewing everything as quanta as in Quantum Mechanics. The wave properties of matter are what QM is all about. Abra gets a zero. His statements are false and indefensible. Light actually slows down in a medium. Look it up. And the fact is, if you don't understand wave functions in QM, you don't understand QM. Everything that I was referring to was entirely based on the Schrödinger WAVE Equation. So I have absolutely no clue what you are even talking about. And in my analysis it would take light longer to propagate through a medium. But photons never 'slow down', they can't. The only way they could do that is if you want to bring back the old classical notion of an 'ether'. Quantum mechanics is, by definition, mechanics that occur at a quantum level. At a macro level they are called simply "mechanics" or "mechanics of solids" as the case my be. A field where I have a great deal of expertise. Well, you may have a great deal of expertise in simple mechanics, but clearly you know nothing about quantum mechanics. If you believe that Quantum Mechanics isn't affected by the macro environment please explain to us why a double-slit experiment and a single-slit experiment have different quantum results? The only difference in those two experiments is the macro environment is it not? I confess that it's been quite a while since I've actually done any mathematics, but if I recall correctly the wave functions that are put into the Schrödinger WAVE Equation to calculate the probability distributions are indeed descriptions of the macro world. This is how the probability distributions are calculated. So the Schrödinger WAVE Equation itself demands that the macro world determines what the probability distributions will be. And that was my whole point. The wave properties of matter are what QM is all about. Abra gets a zero. His statements are false and indefensible. Light actually slows down in a medium. Look it up. And the fact is, if you don't understand wave functions in QM, you don't understand QM. Well then by your own proclamation you get a zero because you clearly don't even have a clue how the Schrödinger WAVE Equation even works. You better stick to the simple mechanics that you're an expert at because clearly you know nothing of Quantum Mechanics. Why are you going around giving people "zeros" in a field of science that you obviously know nothing about?  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps in the end there are many ways to use and see how Quantum Mechanics works, the reason why so many in colleges have a problem understanding it. It is inflexible like jello pudding, yet firm also when the user wants it to be.
Therefore, this could be why there are misunderstandings altogether in this debate forum as we speak. What do you think? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most quantum functions of any meaning deal with wave functions. Abra uses particles. How in the world did you get that idea from what I wrote? Clearly the problem here has nothing to do with physics but with your reading skills. I never claimed to be treating anything as 'particles'. I was viewing everything as quanta as in Quantum Mechanics. The wave properties of matter are what QM is all about. Abra gets a zero. His statements are false and indefensible. Light actually slows down in a medium. Look it up. And the fact is, if you don't understand wave functions in QM, you don't understand QM. Everything that I was referring to was entirely based on the Schrödinger WAVE Equation. So I have absolutely no clue what you are even talking about. And in my analysis it would take light longer to propagate through a medium. But photons never 'slow down', they can't. The only way they could do that is if you want to bring back the old classical notion of an 'ether'. Quantum mechanics is, by definition, mechanics that occur at a quantum level. At a macro level they are called simply "mechanics" or "mechanics of solids" as the case my be. A field where I have a great deal of expertise. Well, you may have a great deal of expertise in simple mechanics, but clearly you know nothing about quantum mechanics. If you believe that Quantum Mechanics isn't affected by the macro environment please explain to us why a double-slit experiment and a single-slit experiment have different quantum results? The only difference in those two experiments is the macro environment is it not? I confess that it's been quite a while since I've actually done any mathematics, but if I recall correctly the wave functions that are put into the Schrödinger WAVE Equation to calculate the probability distributions are indeed descriptions of the macro world. This is how the probability distributions are calculated. So the Schrödinger WAVE Equation itself demands that the macro world determines what the probability distributions will be. And that was my whole point. The wave properties of matter are what QM is all about. Abra gets a zero. His statements are false and indefensible. Light actually slows down in a medium. Look it up. And the fact is, if you don't understand wave functions in QM, you don't understand QM. Well then by your own proclamation you get a zero because you clearly don't even have a clue how the Schrödinger WAVE Equation even works. You better stick to the simple mechanics that you're an expert at because clearly you know nothing of Quantum Mechanics. Why are you going around giving people "zeros" in a field of science that you obviously know nothing about? No Abra, it is you that can write a million words to prove over and over that you don't understand how light really does slow down in a medium. And you keep trying to throw the word "particle" into the argument because you don't have a clue. You keep saying that it can't because you don't understand the wave functions. It is really sad to pretend to understand a topic and get caught when you don't. It is much sadder to see a lack of intellectual honesty go along with it. The "grade" that I gave you was a satire of the "grades" you have given others in other threads. It was meant to be an mirror of your arrogance. Sorry you didn't get the joke. If you knew anything about "mechanics", you would know that all your references to "Macro effects" were inappropriate. If you had any experience studying the effects of nitrogen freezing on the properties of matter, peening to introduce near surface compression forces, crystalline realignment in metals during deformation, etc., you would know the field of mechanics requires knowledge of quanutm effects, even when the effects are zero. But you don't. You continue to act like a small child who has been caught red handed in an indefensible act, who will say anything to try to save face, except admit that he was wrong. Mingle has a 9/11 thread. There were those who claimed to want to know how the buildings fell. Since all the math and physics involved are common to some of my work. I posted several explanations of the inner workings of the failures. No matter how much real science and engineering I gave them, there were those who kept jumping back to the conspiracy theory because that is what they wanted to believe. No amount of straight forward facts mattered. Light slows in a medium, it doesn't jump around. Grow up. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Quietman_2009
on
Tue 08/25/09 06:12 AM
|
|
Light slows in a medium, it doesn't jump around. that is why materials have an "index of refraction" the refractive index of air is 1 water is about 1.33 that is why light bends as it passes through glass or water 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Light slows in a medium, it doesn't jump around. that is why materials have an "index of refraction" the refractive index of air is 1 water is about 1.5 that is why light bends as it passes through glass or water Now that is interesting indeed. Thanks for sharing that as I always wondered why light turns directions in water or like you say bends. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Light slows in a medium, it doesn't jump around. that is why materials have an "index of refraction" the refractive index of air is 1 water is about 1.5 that is why light bends as it passes through glass or water Now that is interesting indeed. Thanks for sharing that as I always wondered why light turns directions in water or like you say bends. that's why fiber optics work. if the light bends enough there is "total internal reflection" and it stays in the material instead of passing through |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
smiless
on
Tue 08/25/09 06:16 AM
|
|
Light slows in a medium, it doesn't jump around. that is why materials have an "index of refraction" the refractive index of air is 1 water is about 1.5 that is why light bends as it passes through glass or water Now that is interesting indeed. Thanks for sharing that as I always wondered why light turns directions in water or like you say bends. that's why fiber optics work. if the light bends enough there is "total internal reflection" and it stays in the material instead of passing through Now my LCD , I think it is called Liquid Crystal Display right? Is this also a total internal reflection? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it's the old Snell's Law
 where the sine of the incident angle over the sine of the refracted angle is equal to the velocity of the light in the first medium (v1) over the velocity of the light in the second medium (v2) and is equal to the index of refraction of the second medium (n2) over the index of refraction of the first medium (n1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Quietman_2009
on
Tue 08/25/09 06:24 AM
|
 the blue line is at such an angle that it is reflected internally so in a fiber optic there is a core glass of a certain index and a cladding glass of a lower index and the angle of insertion makes it work like this 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
egads I just woke up and your making me think
I need more coffee |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
egads I just woke up and your making me think I need more coffee Sorry I got you thinking so early in the morning. lol Now the information you posted is for the LCD question right? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by the way the refractive index of a material is calculated as the ratio of the speed of light through the material as compared to the speed of light through a vaccum
the refractive index of air is actual like 1.03 but everybody just calls it 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
tngxl65
on
Tue 08/25/09 06:36 AM
|
|
Light slows in a medium, it doesn't jump around. that is why materials have an "index of refraction" the refractive index of air is 1 water is about 1.33 that is why light bends as it passes through glass or water I understand that light refracts... I even understand the math. What I've never really understood is why, when light slows, it changes direction. What causes it to actually bend? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Light slows in a medium, it doesn't jump around. that is why materials have an "index of refraction" the refractive index of air is 1 water is about 1.33 that is why light bends as it passes through glass or water I understand that light refracts... I even understand the math. What I've never really understood is why, when light slows, it changes direction. What causes it to actually bend? that comes from the wave property of light. when it meets a medium with a different index of refraction (think of it as thicker) the leading edge of the wave is slowed down while the trailing edge of the wave doesn't and that causes it to bend |
|
|
|
|
