Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I'm not totally enamoured with the idea of wave-particle duality. It's particles, all the way down.
And that is why you don't exist in two places at once.
Electron holes are imaginary particles used to simplify models of atomic lattices and the like. They aren't real particles, but they can be modelled as such, much as cars moving forward to fill a gap in traffic can be modelled as a gap moving backward through traffic. Obviously the gap isn't a real car, and an electron hole isn't a real particle; what's really going on is that cars and electrons are moving about, creating the illusion that there's this phantom particle (or car) moving about.
.
That's what I was attempting to explain and understand.
0.041048 kg, to 5 significant figures.
Assuming it's cylindrical... 0.020271 kg, to 5 significant figures.
It doesn't try to explain radioactive decay. Rather, it tries to show the peculiar properties inherent in quantum superposition (that is, a system being in two states at once). Decay is simply how the system gets into that peculiar superposition of states.
Electron holes are imaginary particles used to simplify models of atomic lattices and the like. They aren't real particles, but they can be modelled as such, much as cars moving forward to fill a gap in traffic can be modelled as a gap moving backward through traffic. Obviously the gap isn't a real car, and an electron hole isn't a real particle; what's really going on is that cars and electrons are moving about, creating the illusion that there's this phantom particle (or car) moving about.
Electron holes aren't particles
Yes. It is an imaginary particle, not a genuine particle. The former phrase refers to a phenomenon that acts as if it were a particle (that is, it's convenient, easy, and mathematically elegant to model it as a particle), but, in fact, is not a genuine particle (in this case, it's simply the collective behaviour of many, many genuine particles).
No, since it's not different to making up something called 'wind' to explain why trees go all bendy (there is no continuous fluid, just tiny balls bumping into each other).
Phonons aren't particles: they behave as if they are, and it's mathematically simpler to model them as if they are, but they're not. They're conglomerates of particles, but that doesn't make them particles themselves. I'm made of atoms, but I'm not an atom.Yes they are.
Also phonons, virtual photons, etc they are all particles.
What else would you call them?
By that time, pigs will be extinct, so for the purpose of making rubgy balls, we'll have to get the skin from somewhere...
Depends on how information is stored. Does the soul get split? Is my conciousness preserved, or destroyed and a new one created in its place? Do I take a gamble and hope that my me ends up in the robot and not the other me?
Yes, usually after death
.
A fundamental quantum of matter (e.g., electrons, quarks, photons). This includes virtual particles, which are so-called because they exist for such a brief time that they may as well not exist at all (e.g., quantum foam).
