steevey

How is a photon hitting an electron measuring it in any way? And what about the photon itself? Just because a photon hits an electron doesn't mean the photon is determined either.

So your trying to say that the photon hitting the electron determines it whether there's an observer or not?

That's pretty quick, so if an electron re-emits a photon without actually doing anything else before the photon is emitted but after the electron has absorbed it, doesn't that mean that "movements" on the atomic and subatomic level are quantized? I'm not saying as in moving from one orbital to the next, I mean as if the trajectory of the electron itself around an atom was quantized and appeared to be moving around it in a pixel-like fashion.

I'm saying for a photon not matching the exact limit of an electron, when it hits that electron, what happens before the electron "re-emits it"? Because it can't go to some energy level in-between the exact energy levels, but at the same time, the energy has to go somewhere, or that the electron has to do something with that extra energy.

That's been predicted be Stephen Hawking as an explanation for any radiation that would appear to be coming from a black hole itself aside from obvious jets which don't come from a black hole itself.

There are no observed boundaries for the universe. Also, as far as scientific consensus is concerned, the universe also has no observed center, even though the universe is said to exist in denser and hotter states previously in time. As far as I see it though, I don't see how the universe couldn't be infinite. Why would space itself, something not proven or disproven to exist, wouldn't go on infinitely, or why there wouldn't be infinite room for matter to expand into. What would be stopping the existence of infinite space? There's also something else too, since the fabric of space itself is not proven to exist, even though the universe is said to be filled with virtual particles, there could still be space of nothingness between those, which if thats the case and true space is nothing, there could be infinite "nothing", since there would be no amount of something to run out of, and there wouldn't be a "something" that needs to travel distances.

If he's saying they existed before the big bang happened, scientists have no idea. I've been to a few lectures an every time someone asks something about the big bang itself or before the big bang, the physicists just immediately ducks for cover or gets away from that topic, because we have no idea. It's not that its wrong, but no one can tell either.

If the photon hits the electron but hasn't hit your retina yet, will the electron be determined? Also, I don't think just any interaction between particles collapses a wave function otherwise particles couldn't be entangled through close interaction.

So if the photon doesn't fit the required energy to move the electron exactly the next or some multiple of the next energy level, then the photon will be absorbed and re-emitted nearly instantly?

Never thought they could "easily" collide, but if they occupy the same region of space at the same time, how does the electron know the difference between that fits its energy level and one that doesn't?

Like an improbability field, which I think you would understand as a "wave function" which essentially maps out a particle's existence. But how does a photon hit an electron without interacting with it? If a photon doesn't have enough energy, the universe automatically sees it coming for every electron and makes the electron move out of the way or something? And what about photon interactions with a nucleus?

If the light is reflected, then that means the photon hit the electron, but the electron didn't absorb it? And if electron's exist in such improbable states, why are reflected photons so easy to predict perfectly? Also, what exactly do you mean by "transmitted"?

So it just passes right through the electron as if the electron never existed? That doesn't make sense, I mean there waves, how do waves which spread out over technically indefinite probability fields not hit each other when they pass right through the same region of space at the same time? Why wouldn't it just hit a lower level electron if it passed right through outermost electron? Whats going to happen then? The electron would want to go someone, but there's no room in the higher orbitals...

One of the many worlds interpretations comes from the search for the Higgs Boson or Higgs field which the fermi lab and the Hadron Colider are trying to find. What they suspect is that gravity is weak because the other forces of nature only work in 3 dimensional space, which the Higgs Bosons go into either other dimensions or other universes and come into our universe as well. There's also some philosophical aspects of general quantum theory such as super position and probability fields which lead to all possible positions of matter happening simultaneously, but in a way so that there's universes for all possibilities. ON top of all that, there's also the membrane theory which has something to do with strings or extra dimensions and says this universe exists as a membrane in an even greater space occupied by other membranes, which when they crash into each other form a "big bang", which to me sounds kind of ridiculous. The the colliders generally do is collide different types of particles which I suppose can include anti matter if they handle it carefully. And if the collider finds some predicted particles, it would be more than anti-matter that they will know about, because in dark matter too, they are predicted to have a sort of particle structure type which mirrors that of our own normal matter, but interacts with forces differently and more weakly which is how they explain it being not visible or tangible yet having a gravitational effect.

So what happens to the photon when it gets absorbed by the electron that doesn't jump an electron level?? Does the electron just re-emit it?

What exactly happens when a photon hits an electron with the improper amount of energy to push it up exactly to the next possible orbital? Why couldn't it jump two or more orbitals if it absorbed a really high energy photon? What happens if an electron with a really high energy orbital gets struck by a red photon?

I'm really guessing that they don't, because gravitons and strings are two different things.

electrons exist as physical objects, but they just act differently than anything in the classical world. Electrons can and observably do exist as points or pieces of matter, but because of the uncertainty principal, the observable "size" depends on the energy and mass. The important thing is: You have to be able to see it as a wave and a particle at the same time.

It's not that the can't both be right, its that they can't both by the answer for the same thing. In one instance, you may need to describe a system which only involves 8 dimensions. In another, you may need 10 or 16, and so the equations are changed. Of course you can't use x^2 to represent the volume, you need x^3, but both are true for whatever instances they need to describe. X^2 does work for area, and X^3 does work for volume. Even though we know there's at least 3 dimensions, we can still use mathematics for 2 or less dimensions in reality. According to the notion of the uncertainty principal, something with infinitely general energy will have an infinitely precise position. There's also the fact that evidence shows denser and hotter states of the universe and that singularities are the only way to explain black holes.

If I remember what he's talking about correctly, I think its this one

If scientists don't know thats fine, but what it appears to be caused by is some type of way the wave physically acts, which I'm sort of stretching the boundaries of "physical" with because an electron can exist in multiple places at once, or re-appear and disappear, which is what I'm saying are physical events. In the event that the electron exists in no specific region of space, the electron is still a completely physical piece of matter, which is probably what swan doesn't understand about my thinking.

Well as I've said before in other topics too, the problem isn't that the theories are crazy, its that the only thing supporting them are mathematical equations which would describe why something works the way it works. But at one point, the only thing supporting the existence of atoms were the mathematical equations which showed you can predict how steam moves if you treat it like its made of individual atoms, and behold they were right while many people were saying that's crazy.

I think that video is representing that the magnetic field is rotating, but it never stated that the electron itself physically spun.

Spin is just the orientation of the magnetic field right? So doesn't that itself spin, even if the electron doesn't? I mean, its a direction and magnitude... I think that the electron may not spin, but at least the magnetic field does in some way.

Not only that, but even something like shining a flashlight is governed strongly by quantum mechanics. There's the fact that its a wave and then becomes determined once it hits your retina, then even before all that, the uncertainty principal is effecting it.