I see.
If inertial and gravitational mass are equivalent, does this mean that increasing speed for a body also increases its gravitational mass? I know about the increase of inertial mass with speed, for a body, and I know about the time dilation and decreasing length, but I'm curious about mass.
What do you mean by 1% of the mass?
1% of the gravitational mass?
Does the Higgs boson exert gravity?
Isn't the Higgs boson responsible for all the inertial mass?
I know that the Higgs boson gives particles their mass. I know that there are two kinds of mass: inertial mass and gravitational mass. I know that the Higgs boson gives the inertial mass, but is there a relationship between it and gravity? If so, what is that relationship? As far as I know...
But how do you get an interference pattern if the particle does not interfere with itself? I'm talking about shooting one particle at a time. It's not like multiplying a single-slit experiment by two, it's totally different.
Yes, I think so too. But there are some strange things about those double slit experiments with polarized photons. For example, it doesn't matter if you polarize the photons, they will still give an interference pattern. The problem appears when each slit polarizes them differently. You can see...
I've read that pdf you linked to but I did not understand much of it, as I'm not too good at physics, I've studied something else.
I think you are right, any observation interferes with the experiment, especially on a quantum level. When I first heard of the double slit experiment with...
I don't know if I got this right, but as far as I know, if you are able to deduce through which slit the particle went through, it behaves classically, if you have no way of deducing through which slit the particle went through, it behaves in a quantum way (interference pattern).
Now, I don't...
Isn't the photoelectric effect a quantum effect?
Digital cameras and laser printers use the photoelectric effect, therefore, they are based on quantum physics.
Am I wrong?
OK
I meant "at rest" in respect to the CMB which represents space itself.
Is there time dilation in space expansion if the bodies have the same mass (negligible mass) and remain "at rest" in respect to the CMB?
Thank you. I feel pretty stupid that it didn't cross my mind, it was obvious and I knew about the Doppler shift.
Now I'm curious how astronomers know that the redshift we see from distant galaxies is cosmological redshift and not Doppler redshift.
I don't really understand where I was wrong...
How do you define "at rest" in the Universe?
I was reading in a Scientific American an article called: "Misconceptions about the Big Bang" By Charles H. Lineweaver and Tamara M. Davis.
In it I found this:
Individual galaxies move around at random within clusters, but the clusters of...