Recent content by ravisastry

Thanks Bill for the explanation... you mentioned about atom being polarized in uniform electric field (atom is still accelerating) and hence takes elongated shape rather than a circle.. what i was thinking is..the inertia might also have some effect in distorting the shape ?

Dear all, correct my understanding... Inertia should be applicable at sub atomic level as well. right ? Consider this scenario, a positively charged helium ion is accelerating. the electron cloud in this case should be somewhat oval or elliptical right ? this would be because, the...

the reason why i asked this question was, the answer to my question would have repercussions on the explanation for 2nd postulate of special theory of relativity...

someone pls explain this :)...does it concur with what i said earlier ?

inertia at sub atomic level please pardon if this was answered earlier..i couldn't find myself. Inertia should surely apply at sub atomic level as well. Consider this scenario, a positively charged helium ion is accelerating. the electron cloud in this case should be somewhat oval or...

the way I am looking at this is...speed of light, is not its inherent characteristic, rather it is soley dependent on the permittivity and permeability of the medium. If we start thinking in this way, then we probably can have a reasoning for the 2nd postulate of SR... No matter what the speed...

i was going through the explanation of maxwells EM theory and i came to know that the speed of EM radiation is dependent only on permittivity or permeability of the medium in which it propogates. Hence, come up with a material which can beat vacuum on permittivity & permeability values and...

Dale..thanks for clarification. Philip, i like the analogy...but neutrons have 1 up quark, 2 down quarks Protons have 2 up quarks, 1 down quark and neutrinos are elementary particles, just like quarks... so the neutrons splitting is quite possible..my next question would be... during...

Thanks for your reply...what my line of thinking is... Electron has charge...and so is surounded by electric field, namely negative electric field. Similarly, proton is surrounded by positive electric fields. These are 2 different fields...yet they exist right ? why can't we have photons...

well, it may sound weird...but my thinking says, photons(or electromagnetic radiation) are of two (or more )types/charge flavours...let me drop this before others start calling me a crack pot :P

this is not convincing :(...its like creating things out of nothing...ppl always talk about end products and say there is + and -, hence net charge is zero. My question is...where/how did + and - did come in the first place ? my hypothesis...charge has to be conserved as well, not just the...

sorry, was thinking on this and somehow...not convinced yet. My questions are.. 2 photons(gamma rays) can combine (under special circumstances) to form an electron and a positron. pls check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-photon_physics from where did these charges of electrons and positrons...

Thanks for the clarification..its clear now :)

i was searching on the net following my post on pf and came across this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-photon_physics "If the energy in the center of mass system of the two photons is large enough, matter can be created" actually, the value how i arrived was, equating e=mc2 = hv. Take mass of...

can someone provide answer to this question ? I'm of the opinion that the highest frequency of a photon would be 2 X 1.23558996 × 10^20...any frequency beyond this means, the photons are so tightly coupled that, they form electron-positron pair ?