Recent content by mraptor

Nice.. ok now how can I calculate displacement or time taken to cross specific distans having this acceleration... I suppose I can't use : d = x + v*t + 1/2 a*t^2 because this is only valid for constant acceleration ?

hi, I want to calculate how is acceleration changing if I have changing mass, but constant trust i.e. : T = m*a a = T / m (I know it has to be calculus). Then again I also wan't to be able to calculate displacement and velocities etc.. Trying to find somewhere on the internet a...

So you are saying that he is implying that he is doing definite-integral, rather than indefinite-integral.. That is why he is getting ΔS, rather than S

I thought : ∫ dS = S not ΔS ! that is what I can't get.. and also what about the reverse conversion..

hi, Reading a book on thermodynamics and the guy often uses something like this : ∫1/T dQ = ΔS and then he says "this in differential form" : dQ/T = dS I kind of get the idea visually that one slice of "integral" will be dQ and you can think of it this way. But my question is how...

If I think of a photon as a wave, could I then speculate that the amplitude of the EM field is consequence of "resonance" process happening with the wave-photons i.e. the more photons resonating at specific frequency the higher amplitude I will get because they interfere.. and uncertaincy comes...

And that is because... -- You can measure the EM field with classical instrument and calculate from there the probably the photon count and their average parameters. -- And you can detect individual photons and get information about them... -- But you can not measure all the photons one by one...

Let me do another summation that just popped to me mind, let me know if I'm correct. The energy output from the impact of EM-wave is still dependent on the Amplitude as in classical mechanics, the difference is that this amplitude now can be clearly linked to the particles which (in a sense...

Ok, I see the Amplitude is quantized...makes more sense. Thanks alot, have to ponder abit, before I come with the next question. "The probability part comes in when one tries to predict when the amplitude changes its constrained value. The transition can occur at any time. This is analogous a...

Ok, can I rephrase it like this then : The electromagnetic wave carries the energy but deposits it only when there is "impedance" of the frequency between the EM-wave and the materail and the transfer of energy happens only when there is a match of frequencies (resonanse).

thanks, So in a sense, the scientists saw that increasing the brightness(amplitude) increases the current, but if the light that was shone was of specific colors you didnt get any current at all and in other colors you got current. So they saw that the frequency act like a switch and...

How did the scientists decided that Energy is not dependent on Amplitude ? Also a derivation in clasical physics that shows that Energy of the wave is dependent on Amplitude (belive it or not, i couldn't find any on google !). Example how normally this relation is mentioned ...

I get confused when I read that the Energy of wave in classical mechanics is correlated to the amplitude E ~ A^2 (pls. point me to a doc which shows that, couldn't find any exact formula on internet), but then when we are talking about atoms,photons,electrons they say it is dependent on the...

I was about to ask exactly this questions.. I found derivatoin of E =mc^2, and de Broigle eq p = h/lambda, but not E = hf

Found couple of things which I'm reading now... when I'm bit more knowledgeable will revisit the question again .. http://tutorial.math.lamar.edu/Classes/DE/DirectionFields.aspx Setting up the problem initial conditions is the bigger part of it... mentioning it is a wave-equation is just sort...