Recent content by Islam Hassan

Maybe I misunderstood regarding the requirement for continuous paths in Lagrangian mechanics...will check. In the field-theoretic application of Lagrangian mechanics, I suppose the fields are taken as quantised and not continuous then? IH

In the following thread: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/particle-movement-in-quantum-mechanics.1054807/ the discussion established/confirmed that the matter of a particle’s continuity of movement in Quantum Mechanics QM is not a scientific question in QM, refer to PeroK post # 6...

Then I don't understand the novelty of this discovery. What exactly is new with this announcement? Maybe the fact that a specific energy range is quoted as indicated by this excerpt from the "Short and Simple" article: “These are the first measurements of neutrino interaction cross sections in...

Can you kindly elaborate on why the electron neutrino was never detected before in a particle accelerator. Was it because of lower energy levels than can be detected with neutrinos captured in cosmic ray detectors? IH

So if I understand correctly, QM prescribes that if a particle exists in the absolute sense, it can be detected somewhere. QM does not extend this logic to the particle's movement being continuous or not. Intuitively, people --and especially laymen-- cannot help wondering whether this is the...

So time is simply relative movement. Unlike gravitational mass vs inertial mass, there is no stand-alone, inertial time measure.

Yes that is understood, and both those processes at the microscopic level involve movement, of sub-atomic particles or anything else. I did not mean movement in a macroscopic sense only.

We only measure time via the relative movement of a standard, agreed reference, a clock for example. If we replaced all instances of "time" in the formulation of SR and GR by "relative motion [ie, of an agreed reference]", would SR/GR remain correct/consistent? Or does SR/GR rely on a deeper...

Thanks Dan, that pretty much sums it up for me!! Theoretical continuous movement is out of the scope of QM due to the uncertainty principle...at least out of the scope of QM as it is formulated today.IH

Thank you Halc...re the electron orbit, that's why I put the word in quotation marks 'orbit'... If QM says nothing about what goes on between measurements, what do physicists speculate about a particle's movement being smooth and continuous or not...if of course they engage in such speculation...IH

Niels Bohr famously said --and I paraphrase-- that QM is an abstract description of nature and that it can only prescribe what we can say about nature rather than what nature is. What does QM say about the movement of a particle? Is this movement positively ascertained to be smooth and...

Yes I have, some time ago and I substantially found nothing. I was intrigued by an article I once read somewhere on the net that said that black holes contained the majority of the mass in the universe, which seemed odd. This question has been on my mind since then...recently I said to myself...

What percentage of the universe’s A) total mass —including dark matter— and B) radiation energy is estimated to reside in: Inter-galactic space covering i) inter-galactic medium and ii) distinct inter-galactic astronomical objects; and Galaxies covering iii) inter-stellar gas clouds, iv) stars...

Wonder why it suddenly gets so much media attention though...is something different this time or people simply didn't do enough due diligence and research?...even CNN is on the bandwagon...slow news day probably...IH

Thanks for the clarification. Is pair production the same as annihilation? Or can annihilation produce a multiple photon burst?IH