derek w

An excitable medium,an oscillating particle in such a medium would create waves that split the medium,into virtual matter at the peaks of the waves and virtual anti-matter at the troughs of the waves.Energy from the particle being imparted into the medium and visa versa energy from the medium being imparted back into the particle.Creating a wave/particle duality.

Does wave/particle duality come from the fact that matter and energy distorts space-time,and visa versa distorted space time effects matter?Particles create a field of virtual particles in the local space-time that surrounds them?Particles and space-time interact with each other.

The absorption spectrum of an atom can also be altered if it's in a magnetic field,lowering the frequency require to make an electron jump to a higher energy shell.

Both the uncertainty principle and the observer effect come about because of wave/particle duality.

According to the theory,matter and energy distort space-time,curving it around themselves. Does the Higgs field replace this theory?

Is the Higgs field a medium through which particles have to travel?

The majority of the mass comes from the gluon holding the quarks in a bound state.The sum of the the mass of 2 up and 1 down quark(the constituent parts of a proton) is much less than a proton.And most of the mass of an atom is in it's nucleus. So if the question is what is matter,you need to ask what is a gluon. I have a question,is a gluon similar or related to the Higgs field?

I think 'xxx200' has a valid point.But an electron and positron will annihilate and produce photons,which have no charge and no mass. On the other hand 2 photons with enough energy can produce an electron/positron pair,which do have charges. So although I think xxx200 has a point,I think he is wrong to say that matter is nothing but charges. A neutron which has no charge does add to the mass of an atom.

If you could go outside the universe,and look at it from a far,would the universe look like a living organism,with structure and systems? stars that create elements that make planets,with atmosphere etc.

Yes you are right the video does not explain how you observe an electron.Any detector that is capable of detecting an electron must interfere with it?

If you google the phrase "Its confirmed:matter is merely vacuum fluctuations". Then there is an article in New Scientist and a link to another thread on this site(no sorry its a link to physics forum),with the same title. There was a lot of objection to the word "confirmed".

Mathematically you can say that 0 =( +1 -1)10^18/sec = E If you have an aether that can be a nothingness but can also be split into matter and anti-matter(with borrowed energy from nothing)for a brief amount of time,so that matter and anti-matter only oscillates in and out of existence. A creative aether?

Does the the energy for Hawkin's radiation come from the matter that is being pulled into the black hole by gravity? Would the centre of a black hole be at absolute zero,because all the energy gets radiated out?

If the transmitter produces waves of energy at required frequency,which then become weaker as they propagate outwards across space,but provided the antenna is close enough the electro-magnetic waves can still induce an oscillation of electrons in the conduction band of the antenna,which can be amplified and filtered by the radio equipment. But why do I need to believe in particles of light? If I go onto the photo-electric effect,then yes you need packets or quanta of energy to move electrons in energy shells within the atom.But how do we know whether its an energy spike where waves interfere and create nodes or whether its particles of light(photons)?

Yes sorry,EMF is short range,while electro-magnetic radiation is long range(which consists of photon). Am I right in saying that,oscillations of the movement of electrons in the conduction band,produces a electro-magnetic field around the antenna,and the EMF gives of electro-magnetic radiation in the form of photons at the required frequency?

Use blue tac or potty putty on a stick.

100,000 million protons squeezed into a beam the size of a human hair,but then it is still mostly empty space,so they only get about 20 collisions.

Basically not a hope in hells chance.

I have a question,a point I am not sure of regarding the radio antenna,are electrons being knocked out of atoms in the same way as the photo-electric effect? I didn't think radio waves had enough energy/frequency to do this?

So am I to take it that wavelength is governed by the time between cycles of the highest probability to lowest probability and back to highest probability?

There is another thread in the physics forum called "the Higgs boson is it's own anti-particle" try there.

Are the photons driving the early expansion of the universe by giving up some of their energy to the protons and electrons?

Question.When they accelerate particles at the LHC,by inputting a lot of energy and then focusing that energy at the point of collision,are they causing new particles to emerge from the fabric of space?Does the idea of a Higgs boson imply that there is a fabric of space?