[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 1.35 MB, 4032x3024, A5468AD8-A179-44BC-A1B7-BCCB27B0D89D.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9863638 No.9863638 [Reply] [Original]

So light has particles and waves? What the fuck is light? And whag the fuck is refracting then? Is there any other things known to man that can separate like pic related?

>> No.9863639

Good thread.

>> No.9863646

>>9863638
https://youtu.be/WIyTZDHuarQ
Oh I love Bohm.

>> No.9863680

>>9863646
>Oh I love Bohm.
Bohm is garbage.

>> No.9863713
File: 234 KB, 1440x1557, 1523896944018.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9863713

>>9863680
Explain why then, brainlet
you're a MWI cuck aren't you

>> No.9863715

>>9863680
>ooga booga bohm mechanics are hard mafs
>hurr durr itz garbage doode

>> No.9863720

>>9863638
quantum U(1) gauge field

>> No.9863731

>>9863713
>you're a MWI cuck
Bohm is garbage, but MWI is even worse. Copenhagen is the only superior interpretation.

>> No.9863733

>>9863731
Retard, you didn't explain why Bohm is "garbage".
Convince me.

>> No.9863741

>>9863638
Light is NOT a particle? It is a wave
For that matter, all matter is a wave

However, due to matters (large matter like you or a brick) wave length being incredible small, it is negligible. On the other hand, lights wavelength is comparable to other small matter (electrons for example) so in certain scenarios and experiments it may behave like a particle and others like a wave.

Imagine a wiggle drawn on a piece of paper up close you clearly see the wiggle but move 100 m away and you’ll just see a dot instead of a wiggle

>> No.9863768

>>9863733
Still not answer? ok Copenhagen cucks

>> No.9863771

both wave and particle?

>> No.9863774

>>9863771
It's a particle riding a guide wave

>> No.9863814

>>9863768
>Still not answer?
I'm not available 24/7 only for you. Take for example https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/7112/why-do-people-still-talk-about-bohmian-mechanics-hidden-variables or http://settheory.net/Bohm

>> No.9863838

>>9863741
If this is the case, what would be the characteristics of large photonic matter?

>> No.9863852

>>9863814
>I'm not available 24/7 only for you
According to Copenhagen you should be

>> No.9863956

>>9863646
desperate attempt to salvage pure determinism in a non-deterministic reality. sorry.

>> No.9863990

>>9863638
Light is such a small particle that it appears to have no mass. Light has spin at the fundamental unit, which manifests in polarization of waves. Light appears to have wave like motion, because it is so light that it bounces off all matter and the spin is reversed the way a bouncy ball's spin is when it hits the ground. It is known.

>> No.9865235

>>9863814
You ABSOLUTE retard. Yes, bohmian mechanics is a hidden variables theory. A GLOBAL one. Not a local one, you autistic faggot.
>b-but violates l-locality :((
Copenhagen cuck interpretation does too. EPR faggot. The difference is that you can't use that non-locality to spread information.
Bohmian mechanics is as valid as Copenhagen cuck interpretation.

>> No.9865242

>>9863956
>He is 100% sure that reality is non-deterministic though there is no proof and Copenhagen is not falsable
You cuck. When you have a proof that explains how truly the quantum world works, come back. For the moment we don't know if the universe is deterministic or not, since there is no proof for your Copenhagen cuckish fetish or for my elegant pilot wave.

>> No.9865244

>>9865242
Copenhagen BTFO

>> No.9865360

>>9865242
>ELEGANT pilot wave
nigger, that thing is ANYTHING BUT.

>> No.9865362

>>9865360
>boo hoo it's more elegant to just believe in magic bruh muh copenhagen
Not my problem that you dont understand the maths of Bohm

>> No.9865390

>>9865235
>Copenhagen cuck interpretation does too.
But it violates locality weakly enough to be able to combine quantum mechanics and special relativity to create QFT. Come back when you have a "bohmiam QFT".

>>9865360
>nigger, that thing is ANYTHING BUT.
This.

>> No.9865475

>>9865390
In general, there seems to be a widespread ignorance among physicists, claiming that Bohmian mechanics is flawed since you cannot make it relativistic. But there are two important facts to acknowledge:

1. Few people work on it, and it is one of the most difficult fundamental problems of physics - so you cannot expect and easy answer.

2. The so-called relativistic quantum theories (QFTs) do predict numbers, but they are only computational schemes for scattering amplitudes and it is very delusive to call them fundamental theories. They do not give a real dynamics, only for infinite times. And they are not manifestly Lorentz invariant, in contrast to the models presented e.g. by Lienert. And also, they are mathematically not well-defined and the procedure of renormalization is, to say the least, obscure.

>> No.9865530

light us a particle.

since it has no mass, it cannot be at rest.

it moves at all times at infinite speed in vacuum.

the simulation our reality runs on has a hard limit on information travel, we call this the speed of light as light is the first phenomenon measured to reach it.

a light particle travels a path that delimits the boundary of an expanding sphere at infinite speed, the sphere expands at c.

the particle can interact with other matter and appear to slow down, but really its path is just become more complicated

critically, as the photon hurtles at infinite speed along a space-filling curve, when its path is disrupted by interaction with perturbing forces such as gravity, magnetism of intervening matter parts of the path can he abridged, the photon "skips" across from one diverticulum of the space filling curve, and also to retrace paths it has already crossed - it appears to interfere WITH ITSELF in the manner of a wave travelling in a medium, but this is an illusion.

>> No.9865560

>>9865475
>they are only computational schemes for scattering amplitudes
Experiments are made using scattering, that's why there is so much focus on that, but QFT is more powerful. There you have the prediction for the magnetic anomalous momentum of an electron or the behavior of mesonic and baryonic particles.

>They do not give a real dynamics
What is "real dynamics" for you?

>And they are not manifestly Lorentz invariant
That is manifestly not true.

>they are mathematically not well-defined and the procedure of renormalization is, to say the least, obscure
Yes, they are well defined. And renormalization arises from trying to make sense of the multiplication of distributions. This is well explained, for example, in https://arxiv.org/abs/1201.2714

>> No.9865575

>>9863638
>no one actualy corrected you by saying that your photo's an example of dispersion, not refraction lol
>/sci/ lol

>> No.9865578

>>9865530
>light moves at infinite speed
are you stuck in 17'th century?

>> No.9865586

>>9865362
you fool it's BOHM that's magic you fool. 'muh magical non local magical variables that magically make the universe deterministic' get the fuck out of here.

>> No.9865905

>>9863638
>So light has particle and waves

Light is neither a particle or a wave. A wave is what something does and there is no such thing as indivisible particles bumping around with no rhyme or reason like billiard balls.
Waves? Waves of what? A wave is what something does, to say a "wave" is something is the same as admitting that your hand "emits" water when splashing around in a pool. You're not "emitting" anything, you're displacing the water and the resulting perturbations and displacements take the form of a waving motion.
Particles? Perturbations of a medium. Nothing "indivisible" about them at all.

>What the fuck is light?

A modality of dielectricity and magnetism

>And what the fuck is refracting then?

Longitudinal compressions and refractions are the dielectric. There is no "wave" attribute about them. There is no speed associated with it, it is instantaneous.

>> No.9866314

>>9865530
>light moves at infinite speed
idk about that