B Can a Wave Exist Without a Medium?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gary Smith
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Wave
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around whether waves can exist independently of a medium, with participants clarifying the types of waves in question, such as classical versus quantum. It emphasizes that physical waves require measurable quantities and cannot exist without a medium or means of detection. The concept of "suspension" is debated, particularly in relation to waves and atoms, with distinctions made between philosophical and physical interpretations of existence. Participants also touch on wave-particle duality, noting its outdated status in modern physics and the complexities of understanding quantum behavior. The conversation highlights the need for clarity in terminology and concepts when discussing the nature of waves and particles.
  • #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 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 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
13
Views
999
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
10K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
10K