http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics

**
Imagining the existence of solutions and being able to write them down are quite different things. Suppose we have become so fascinated with a certain set of particles that we have sold our souls to the Devil in exchange for the set of Ys which solve its Schrödinger Equation. Were these solutions to this mathematical puzzle a bargain, or not? What good are the Ys?**


http://www.chem.yale.edu/~chem125/125/quantum/begin/prelim99.html  

--Last edited by ferme on 2007-02-26 08:28:12 --

Hi Ferme
 Lay out the problem with the schrodener equasion for a layman. I have read "schrodeners cat" but what problem are you talking about. In simple terms please.
Cheers
Iseason

Iseason have a look at the video link at the  below url;

http://www.soi.wide.ad.jp/class/20050012/slides/01/22.html


ALSO;

some basic information;
        http://newton.ex.ac.uk/research/qsystems/people/jenkins/mbody/mbody2.html


BASICALLY the Schroedinger Eq gives the Probability of finding a Particle at a certain Point in space. There is NO easy explanation for Schroedinger's Eq to date ..which is why to date it remains important to physics. I should say here that its concept (if you like to call it that) deals with Wavefunctions, and types of phenomena: waves and particles. It would take me several hours to explain the idea, though, the text in red is sufficiently IT ..!



see also below ISEASON ;



BASICS

1. Energy is quantized.

2. Nothing exists discretely. A quantum object (that is, any object) exists only as a wave function, and is perceived in accordance with its probability amplitude, which is the absolute value of the square of its wave function.

3. Objects with a well defined momentum DO NOT HAVE a well defined position, and vice versa. Time and energy share the same relationship - the more precisely you know the energy of an object the less certain its position in time, and vice versa. This is Heisenburg's uncertanty principle.

4. What we perceive as quantum wave interference (in light for example) is the interference (overlapping) of a particle's wave function with itself. This happens because particles are not discrete objects, but rather something else, best described by Schrodinger's wave equation (Greek letter Psi).

5. There is a non-locality aspect of quantum mechanics. That is, objects that are far apart in space have connections, and can affect each other. This does NOT violate the "faster than light" proviso of Special Relativity.

A less basic treatment:

Quantum mechanics, in the theories of quantum electrodynamics and quantum chromodynamics, is arguably the most successful, precise, and fruitful theory ever conceived by the human mind. This sounds like hyperbole, but it is not. Its predictions have been proved without exception, it is precise to some 13 decimal places, and it has led to so much technology it would be easier to list what it hasn't given us.

Quantum mechanics is one of the most profound, counterintuitive, and, in a sense, relieving concepts ever discovered. Profound because it changed the way the universe is understood, counterintuitive because our minds evolved without direct experience of quantum effects, so it's "new" to us, and relieving because it explains why the machinery of the universe isn't perfectly predictable, even in theory. (Some actually argue that quantum mechanics is the root of "free will", as there seems to be no room for free will in the clockwork, theoretically perfectly predictable Newtonian mechanical universe.)

Another amazing aspect of quantum mechanics is that the mathematics for describing quantum physics had been invented/discovered long (a century) before its application was found. (String theory, on the other hand, seems to be pushing mathematics pretty hard.) One other notable time when physics outpaced mathematics was when Newton had ideas that required a new mathematics. He invented the calculus to handle his "fluxions", or continuously variable physics of motion. Fortunatly, calculus had wide ranging applications far beyond Newtonian mechanics. (I'd be remiss to not mention Leibniz, who came upon calculus more from the mathematical angle, at about the same time, and who had much better notations for comprehension, namely the classic dy/dx notation.)

To recap:

1. Energy is not continuous, but quantized. Were energy radiated in a continuous manner, any hot object would radiate at all frequencies, and from that you can deduce that it would be infinitely hot. This clearly doesn't happen, and Planck found the reason. Energy of any kind must exist in discrete amounts, and not in a continuum. Some people would use an analogy here, but since the universe and all in it is quantum, there is no good analogy! A typical one is filling a glass with water in liquid form (continuous) and in ice cube form (quantized), but since water is molecular...
Search for:
Planck's constant
ultraviolet catastrophe
bohr atom

2. Matter particles and energy quanta have both wave and particle aspects, and which manifests depends on how they are observed (the experiment performed). What we perceive as the wave aspect of a quantum object is really the object's wave function _interfering_with_itself_ (when given the opportunity).
Search for:
Young's double slit experiment
Wave particle duality
de Broglie matter waves

3. Momentum and position (and also energy and time) are complimentary. That is, the more precisely you measure one, the more uncertain the other.
Search for:
Heisenburg's uncertanty principle.
4. If a quantum object can go from A to B in a number of different ways, it does. What this means is that the object, in a very real sense, goes from A to B every way it can, simultaneously.
Search for:
Quantum electrodynamics. Quantum chromodynamics. Feynman diagrams. Feynman's "sum over histories". Young's double slit experiment. Schrodinger's wave equation. Schrodinger's cat.
5. Quantum mechanics allows non-local (faster than light) interactions between correlated (or "intertwined") objects.
Search for:
Einstein/Podolsky/Rosen paradox. Aspect's experiment. Non-locality  

--Last edited by saucer on 2007-03-04 15:23:53 --

Thanks for that . I'll come back with comment.

Iseason

http://online.redwoods.cc.ca.us/depts/science/chem/storage/Schrod/index.htm

zee.

the answer is simply that everyone likes constants and fundamental particles so much.
If they are seen as popping in and out of space the parameters increase hundredfold.If they are non-fundamental particles creating nd recreating then the parameters increase trillionfold.
  On the one hand science wants a quantum world , but treats it in a Newtonian fashion. The limits must be set within the observable parameters. Therefore the solution is limited to advances made in our ability to measure or use mathematics.
  It would solve much more quickly if we let The mysteries solve themselves. If light can uncollaborate and collaborate given our interference , then surely in it's own right it has made the chioce before us . therefore it has decided on ways to do this that we could not possibly understand.
  If by my thoughts alone I can cause light to act , perhaps i am finding the range of thought processes that should be explored in depth . Rather than light having strange abilities , I have discovered the concept of mind over matter action. Question are the new answers in science. Those who have answers delude themselves. Those that have solutions have taken a step away from the truth.
  I applaud all that quantum has achieved . But what's next? When will we shed the limits and explore the "what if this were trues?" I haven't seen much of this that isn't about 'time travel'

Cheers
Iseason

Quote :

Iseason wrote :   It would solve much more quickly if we let The mysteries solve themselves. If light can uncollaborate and collaborate given our interference , then surely in it's own right it has made the chioce before us . therefore it has decided on ways to do this that we could not possibly understand.

i, automatically factor-in that 'light' can: collaborate ..un-collaborate .. to use your analogy! maybe in the end Relativity will come up with an explanation that explains that: ..'light' HAS viz ( .. made the choice before us (; your words.))

{this line is particle-physics, too.}


zee.  

--Last edited by zee on 2007-03-23 08:31:11 --

-








-

-









.."  Physics of the early Universe is at the boundary of astronomy and philosophy since we do not currently have a complete theory that unifies all the fundamental forces of Nature at the moment of Creation. In addition, there is no possibility of linking observation or experimentation of early Universe physics to our theories (i.e. its not possible to `build' another Universe). Our theories are rejected or accepted based on simplicity and aesthetic grounds, plus there power of prediction to later times, rather than an appeal to empirical results. This is a very difference way of doing science from previous centuries of research.." ...


http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/ast123/lectures/lec17.html




saucer



-

Abstract:  The investigation of matter at atomic and sub-atomic scales has resulted in a standard particle theory and a family of particles that fit into a matrix of categories based on properties.  Quantum theory depicts particles as behaving both as particles and waves.  The duality of the so-called wavicle is accepted theory and yet the point-like depiction of elementary particles is so unsatisfactory that it has spawned new theories of matter which are known as M theories (string and superstring theories) and quantum gravity.  Some string theories call to mind the old aether-vortex theories of the late 19th and early 20th century such as those described by physicists Oliver Lodge and William Thompson (Lord Kelvin).  These old models of matter have been discarded by the early part of the 20th century as both the Special and General Theory of Relativity gained ground.  Albert Einstein had pronounced the existence of the luminiferous aether as superfluous to an explanation of the transmission of light through the vacuum.  Later, in his work Sidelights in Relativity, he affirmed the existence of an aether of sorts when he realized that his General Theory, a theory of gravity, required space to have physical properties and, therefore, having a property that allowed it to curve, bend, or warp just as a sheet of metal would do, except it would be a sheet of extremely high density material.  It was then difficult to visualize how space and matter co-existed as two separate entities when Einstein started working on his Unified Field Theory hoping to explain all forces as fields, which is to say a dynamic volume of space that influenced matter in certain ways.



With the rise of interest in the quantum nature of the vacuum itself in the latter part of the twentieth century, where space seems to seeth with activity, a zero-point energy has been postulated that seems to reveal that space is a lot less material than envisioned by Einstein and that the incompatibility of quantum mechanics and relativity theory is made even more apparent at the nanoscale of the zero-point field.  



With the dawning of the twenty-first century we are seeing a return to the aether (or ether) of space in new forms, forms that may lead to Unified Field Theory after all.  A Unified Field Theory (UFT) is not a Theory of Everything (TOE) as a TOE proposes to explain everything in existence as having a material cause which may not be the case and is restrictive in its philosophical foundations.  A UFT on the other hand proposes to do what Einstein set out to do:  unify fields of force.



QV Postulate 1:  Space has the properties of a superconducting superfluid.


Courtesy: astrosciences.info  

--Last edited by saucer on 2007-08-19 15:55:47 --