There are multiple competing theories here still. "Science" has not decided. IMHO we haven't even adequately explained the photon-going-thru-two-holes-at-once thing. Electrons do it, and so do small atoms, but not bricks or baseballs...at what point do the quantum rules break down and give way to classical physics?
I would say that our understanding of quantum physics is much more flawed than any other field of physics. The uncertainty principle specifically irks me because I do NOT believe it is a correct depiction of reality. It may be true that we cannot accurately MEASURE position AND velocity simultaneously, but that should not mean that the nature of particles is that they actually exist in probabilities until we measure them.I'm a fan of a vague idea of string theory, though I don't yet understand all the math involved. If you think about it, mass/energy equivalence makes sense if all matter is actually energy. What we call "matter" is only different from energy in that it still exists at zero velocity. Energy such as radiation (light) does not every exist as a stationary object, it has zero rest mass. Somehow this theoretical higgs boson must "contain" vibrations or energy (ripples/vibrations makes sense to me) in a stationary position somehow.
Technically, photons have no rest-mass, and are considered massless particles. Since they do have energy, they have a mass equivalent determined by E=mc^2. But, as governed by Einstein's theory of relativity, anything with mass cannot travel the speed of light without infinite energy to propel it to that speed.Gravity can affect light: bend it like gravitational lensing, red shift it, and even suck it in like a black hole. But it's not because light has mass, it's because matter does.<a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon</a>
evildemonicDec 8, 2009
There are multiple competing theories here still. "Science" has not decided. IMHO we haven't even adequately explained the photon-going-thru-two-holes-at-once thing. Electrons do it, and so do small atoms, but not bricks or baseballs...at what point do the quantum rules break down and give way to classical physics?
Closed AccountDec 8, 2009
<a class="user" href="http://www.gifanatics.com/files/228410472_261564bd31_o.gif" rel="nofollow">http://www.gifanatics.com/files/228410472_261564bd ...</a>
skissorsDec 8, 2009
I would say that our understanding of quantum physics is much more flawed than any other field of physics. The uncertainty principle specifically irks me because I do NOT believe it is a correct depiction of reality. It may be true that we cannot accurately MEASURE position AND velocity simultaneously, but that should not mean that the nature of particles is that they actually exist in probabilities until we measure them.I'm a fan of a vague idea of string theory, though I don't yet understand all the math involved. If you think about it, mass/energy equivalence makes sense if all matter is actually energy. What we call "matter" is only different from energy in that it still exists at zero velocity. Energy such as radiation (light) does not every exist as a stationary object, it has zero rest mass. Somehow this theoretical higgs boson must "contain" vibrations or energy (ripples/vibrations makes sense to me) in a stationary position somehow.
atarioDec 9, 2009
As calibrated as your browser and hardware are.
luvkitDec 11, 2009
Technically, photons have no rest-mass, and are considered massless particles. Since they do have energy, they have a mass equivalent determined by E=mc^2. But, as governed by Einstein's theory of relativity, anything with mass cannot travel the speed of light without infinite energy to propel it to that speed.Gravity can affect light: bend it like gravitational lensing, red shift it, and even suck it in like a black hole. But it's not because light has mass, it's because matter does.<a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon</a>
v3rtex7740Dec 17, 2009
clear your cache, and load the page againtrial and error will educate you about as quickly as digg users
v3rtex7740Dec 17, 2009
there are worse things