THERE WAS NO LINK when I took issue with the way I thought it worked (not that it mattered when he did post a link, the issue I take with it's opperation is still along the same lines).
If I was arguing that it was definitely not explainable classically for no reason and not open to hearing how...
Excuse me, but you're the one not substantiating what you're claiming, everytime I've put forward a view-point like about your synchrotron, I've explained what I was basing it off like 'well if those electrons were circulating like that the EM would be related to something like quantum spin...
I see what you're saying, I read what you said like the device converted them.
I very much doubt that classical electromagnetism explains this operation though, but you'd know better than me, if you can explain it a bit that'd be interesting.
Where you worked, Victoia I'm assuming?
correct me if I'm mistaken but I think that's misleading as the synchrotron must create a photon and positron if it's creating EMR from free electrons. Which isn't a classical electromagnetism explanation.
my background on the matter is merely second year QM and semiconductor phys.
I'm tempted to ask what you don't understand about the distinction already made. Where to start; the B created in an electric circuit is vertual photon field due to a flow, not oscillation, it is not comprised of an E component nor is it's magnitude related to the frequency of electron...
I would disagree with your assertion that the B created from the electricity is the same B present in the propagation of a photon, that's more conventional classical physics, photons are a different Quantum relm; but if you're happy than good.
I wouldn't say that because I don't know, I can understand your frustration, what source did you read that indicated to you that B was created from the current?
What did you say B was crossed with to produce E ? I thought you meant that the photon was = |B| x |E|.
I think that your drawing is wrong in the same way that showing a yr 9 student an electron revolving around a nucleus is wrong (orbital theory etc)
Extrapolating on your point that drift velocity is negligable I might submit that perhaps the electron doesn't move at all for like kHz just hovers...
Not to add anything to what you've said, maybe to answer my own question of which way along the axis it travels; I should probably of kept in mind that when we talk about a photon as a wavefunction it's all with respect to probability. As in, we don't actually know which way it's traveling due...
obviously what your sayings right concidering radio and telly but I think the electron has to move down an energy level or more to create a photon; I suspect a radio or lightbulb does this in some way. If anyone has anything to complete this picture for us that'd be good.
Well you say that, but if you engineered a skyscraper so that it could be ratcheted up a few inches over the day from wind and solar power you've got yourself a respectable battery. XD
Right'o, ok so say we're running 40W (friction etc ignored), then if our mass is 500kg, g = 9.8Nm^2, and the counterweight is 15m high then it will run for half an hour?
500*9.8*15 / 40 = 1837.5 seconds = 30.635
(meaning that there is 73500 N of energy stored in it? (40W*1837s))
Nice article...
you mean along the waveguide? Perhaps a picture drawn in MS paint would help me understand.
When you said "The "potential" of our "wells" are determined by the refractive indices of our waveguide and surrounding materials."
do you mean like the waveguide is like one big Well and the sides of...
This might seem a bit weird at first but it raised an interesting question to me about power, work and energy.
I watched this show about how the trebuchet is so much more efficient than previous designs and then I sort of thought of it as a way to store energy and I wondered to myself, if you...