Here is an example:
https://press.cern/backgrounders/matterantimatter-asymmetry
I've heard many theoreticians physicists saying the universe is dominated by matter because after the it is what it has left after some period of annihilation processes. I don't know if this is very well...
It is only an example in classical terms related to the Big Bang theory. Classical physics works accepts infinite precision in principle so if you start with a symmetrical system, the symmetry is preserved all the time. We know classical physics doesn't hold at fundamental levels.
What does quantum mechanics have to say about this aspect?
Matter usually differs by antimatter having opposite charge.
It is said that the Universe in the early stages should have created equal amounts of matter and antimatter.
The total charge is conserved no matter the interactions and if...
I've seen some analogies trying to explain gravity to general public using as a model water flowing towards a sink hole in the place of some massive object. I've also seen scientist talking about simulations using air instead of water for a 3d effect, and sound waves.
Sometimes close to...
Gravitational waves spread-out in all directions. How is it possible to have them spinning around each other? Light can modelled as plane waves where all individual waves are parallel to each other, as part of a beam. Will gravitational waves do the same thing in principle? I suppose they can...
Thank you. I thought quantum graviton models gravity so that it gives the same effect for macroscopic objects but not manipulating spacetime curvature but by considering gravitons force carriers similar to photons as force carriers of the electromagnetic field.
Quantisation of spacetime...
Thank you.
But my example is not important anyway. I was only an example of some concept that is easier to explain which of course it doesn't apply to our reality. But the concept of a graviton can be taken into consideration. Even gravitons through a flat spacetime are simpler to understand...
Thank you.
I mean in SR (and we imagine we don't know anything about GR) you can treat gravity as a regular force, generated by a field around massive objects and have waves in that field similarly to the electromagnetic field. But it's only an example that if gravity was like that it would have...
In flat Minkowski spacetime, everything that travels at c, relative to some observer, it travels the same speed relative to any observer. If we refer to gravitons as bosons through this flat spacetime, it is clear they can be defined as travelling at c. And you can even some classical...
I understand that for this kind of experiments you use a laser source which is a light beam that is then passed through a filter can let only a low amount of photon passing through in a given time. I suppose you first need to adjust the apparatus without the filter in place.
But for the setup above the CC is replaced by photon counters. It says in the OP.
The detectors are supposed to capture most of the beams so that after some number n of photons entering the double slit, I suppose we will get n on D0 and n/2 for D1 and D2.
Here is a setup that only uses fixed detectors.
Will the ratio between the number of detections at D0 and the sum of the numbers detected on D1 and D2
be close to 1?
For this question instead of the coincidence counter, 3 simple counters are needed.
Also the detectors D1 and D2 need some lenses...
I know that a high frequency light beam is more likely to generate a virtual electron-positron pair than a low frequency one. Can this probability depend on the reference frame? It seems there is a paradox. How do we explain it?
Yes, but in a non uniform field pointing down (N-S) why would they precess to point up?
QM uses these mathematical concepts to model systems so that the results matches the experimetal results but also can give answers to more complex situations before you will actually perform the experiment...
That means the electrons that go up will have magnetic moment pointing up and there should be a force pointing down because the north pole repells the north pole of the electron. I understand you get the entanglement as spin up goes up, spin down goes down, but why the force is in opposite...