Waves, particles and Einstein ! 1

Waves are something that have no mass and move at the maximum speed, mass m = 0. speed c = 1. So whats their momentum? p = m.v = 0? Right?

No. For pure waves; momentum does not come from mass. It comes only from motion.

(pure wave; they do not have mass)

For matter waves, on the other hand, momentum comes in two ways, mass as well as motion.

(impure, now they have mass)

Albert Einstein recognized this fact and derived his relation; $latex E = \sqrt {(pc)^2+(mc^2)^2}$

This relation is called as Einstein’s relativistic equation, also Einstein’s mass-energy relation. But more appropriately mass-energy-momentum relation.

Let us consider E as the hypotenuse, p and m; as base or perpendicular as is your choice.

triangle_copyThen $latex E = \sqrt {(pc)^2+(mc^2)^2}$ is Pythagoras Theorem; when p is momentum and m is mass.

For pure waves such as photon … the quanta of light, m = 0.

Hence the Pythagorean Triangle is now one, where the mass side is arbitrary small. Thus E = p. More…

Uncertainty Principle and Photography ! Reply

why a moving object becomes fuzzy when you take its picture. Speed bears an uncertainty with momentum (hence energy ) just like time with energy and position with momentum. But for photons which are always ultra-relativistic we should not talk about its positions. Due to speed (relative motion of objects such as your and moving while other body parts being still) energy and momentum are uncertain. Hence position becomes uncertain. (Do not confuse between position of photon vs position/location on your image although its connected to wave-function collapse BEFORE or AFTER the observation ? is the question you should be asking, BEFORE the observation no sense of photon’s position, but AFTER collapse we do see only a particular outcome in terms of fuzzy images.) More…

Equivalence from simple notions of Geometry ? Yes. 4

Now it may also be related that light bends in a denser media compared to a rarer media because an additional rotational force is working. In other words, the definition of straight line has to change in the medium, that is of different density, because path of light is changing. Light is the guy who suffers the least when something tries to buzz it, because its inertial property of mass is zero. The curvature of light or the bending or deflection known as Refraction is thus a measure of the sideways force or energy.

Thus speed of light in different media is a measure of this bending or curvature and is known as Snail’s law ( — Pun intended, its actually; Snell’s Law — ) . Automatically when distance and time have to readjust, to produce an angle or bending, known as refraction ( — possible because distance and time can produce an angle if they are equivalents — ) the speed must also change.

All these are inter related. Light refracts and its speed changes, in relative change in density of media because there are rotational or non-inertial effects.

( — or additional energy is available, or a force is acting to bring a curvature in light’s path, perhaps the electromagnetic effects of the molecules? Its not only distance or time that are equivalents, read one article of mine “All You Need To Know About Relativity” to understand; how energy and time and distance and in short all Physical Variables are equivalents of each other — ) More…

connection between special relativity and general relativity Reply

So deceleration is equivalent to a gravity field. Which is exactly what principle of equivalence of Einstein is. ‘In osme paperwork” I have proved this equivalence from classical mechanics. [only from Newtonian formula for gravity].

This means many special and general relativity ideas are actually also classical mechnaics ideas but Einstein extended them and made them more general, exact and advanced. eg Einstein studied them in more situations than were studied before. Time dilation, equivalence principle and gravitational dilation are all simple classical mechnaics ideas. All the details I have written in recent articles in in this website check last 1-3 months under Relativity/Physics tag.
More…

The basics of Physics — is Gravity amenable to Quantization? 1

The basics of Physics — is Gravity amenable to Quantization?

This is a very detailed and long article, but written in a very simple language, as it seems to me, describing such concepts as; the basis of expectations of “Quantization of Gravity with other forces” which is colloquially known as Einstein’s dream of GUT — or, Grand Unified Theory, and whether such is possible or not and what we may be missing.

This article also describes briefly Pseudo Forces — check a detailed description here. (web-link)

In detail the basis of Physics Formalism — check a discourse here (web-link) and

What are waves and particle — (a link to an extensive discussion will be provided, upon further review), the discussion is in terms of a Formal POV of Physics — ‘slightly”, but much can be based and expanded on such.

This would be one of the most well written article by me as I would think.

So lets get back to the discussion of our original topic of interest.

The basics of Physics — is Gravity amenable to Quantization?

I like to speak first; about a development of Physics, in this article, that follows a chronological path, rather than, how we look at the cumulative understanding, in modern times, upon which we base our statements and help ourselves be inconsistent, because we forget or rather are oblivious; to the deeper framework, in which things were developed.

— Today I want to focus on Gravity. But before I talk about Gravity; I would like to speak something, on Physics itself. More…

Why is energy conserved? 5

Then we can define Attraction A = int[Zda], this accomodates the changing accelerations. Z = dA/da. Attraction is the total force if you consider x,t,v and a not just x,t. Then you can apply least attraction. A least attraction is what we are seeking in nature. We want to take that path for which attraction is the least and stationary over all available paths. More…