Can a Wave Exist Without a Medium?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Gary Smith
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Wave
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the nature of waves, specifically whether they can exist independently of a medium, and explores concepts related to wave-particle duality in both classical and quantum physics. Participants raise questions about the definitions and properties of waves, the relationship between measurement and existence, and the implications of these ideas in different contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether a wave can exist independently or if it must be generated, leading to discussions about the nature of different types of waves.
  • There is a distinction made between physical waves, which require measurable quantities, and hypothetical waves that may exist in mathematical frameworks.
  • Participants discuss the implications of measurement and observation in physics versus philosophical considerations of existence.
  • Some argue that the concept of wave-particle duality is outdated, while others inquire about what has replaced it in modern physics.
  • Questions arise about the meaning of "suspended" in relation to waves and whether this term applies to different types of waves, including standing waves.
  • The discussion includes reflections on the properties of atoms, such as oxygen, and their behavior in different environments, including air and vacuum.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the nature of waves and their existence, with no consensus reached on the definitions or implications of these concepts.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the confusion surrounding the terminology used to describe waves and the conditions under which they exist, highlighting the need for clarity in definitions and concepts.

  • #61
@GarySmith
I have read your info now. I can see how your views are at odds with PF. You say "The implications of conscious matter which can be communicated with have to be right up there with the most significant discoveries/ breakthroughs of science. If it is disproved, I accept it. My first priority is to know the truth." In particular :"If it is disproved, I accept it". That is not the way Science works. If a new idea like Conscious Matter is introduced, it is not the task of the Establishment to disprove it. It is the task of its exponents to Prove it. If you or your chums can prove it exists then it will take its place in main stream Science and PF will accept it. If Science took on board every bit of random fancy that turns up, we would still be using the Four Elements of History and would know nothing about Electricity, Space travel or Curing Disease. Those subjects (and all creditable subjects) are based on Evidence, not fancy.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn and weirdoguy
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
davenn said:
If you want to learn real science, we are all willing to help you.
But if you want to talk about stuff that cannot be grounded in reality, then you are on your own

Dave, I appreciate that you are all willing to help me with learning real science. This morning, I was going to delete some of my earlier comments, as they are straying too far from the PF mission. I am just wondering, how does anything become 'real science'? And in its history, which I do not know, has there ever been stuff which was considered to be not grounded in reality, and then was discovered to in fact be so? My interest is in applying real science to stuff which appears metaphysical but which I suspect will eventually be discovered to be actual. Anyway, I leave the PF with gratitude for everyone's help. If I return in the future, it will be with renewed effort to keep my posts within PF guidelines and the subjects of real science. Thank you all.
 
  • #63
I don't think so ! A wave is a disturbance in a medium. So it needs to be generated by a variation of pressure like factors .
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Gary Smith
  • #64
sophiecentaur said:
It is the task of its exponents to Prove it.

I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. I have been doing my own experiments to objectify ideas. I came to PF to find ways to validate or invalidate the ideas within the context of scientific method.

sophiecentaur said:
If you or your chums can prove it exists then it will take its place in main stream Science and PF will accept it.

My only chum in this is a stone. We may prove it in the end after all. Or not. I think you have been advised by a moderator to avoid the word 'exists' in these threads.

sophiecentaur said:
If Science took on board every bit of random fancy that turns up, we would still be using the Four Elements of History and would know nothing about Electricity, Space travel or Curing Disease.

My subject of interest is hardly a fancy, when you consider its history. Another scientist in the PF told me science has never done serious studies of my subject of interest. If I continue this writing, I will inevitably veer again into non-PF territory. If anyone wants further communication with me, please take it out of the public conversations and into private, to respect the mission of PF. Thank you.
 
  • #65
Gary Smith said:
Another scientist in the PF told me science has never done serious studies of my subject of interest.
That doesn't surprise me at all. It isn't Science.
Gary Smith said:
We may prove it in the end after all.
You have suitable experiments planned, to provide evidence? You will find a willing audience to discuss any work that you plan to do or that you can provide references for
 
  • #66
Brian blake science said:
A wave is a disturbance in a medium. So it needs to be generated by a variation of pressure like factors .

On a particle level, does all motion create disturbance, therefore waves, in the medium through which it moves?
 
  • #67
Gary Smith said:
On a particle level, does all motion create disturbance, therefore waves, in the medium through which it moves?
To the extent that the question is sensible, the answer is "no".

First, there is not necessarily any medium. Second, all motion is relative. A "moving" particle (e.g. a neutron) can equally well be described as being at rest. If it is at rest, it naturally does not create any disturbance.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
16K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
25K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K