Do one-dimensional signals truly exist?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter giann_tee
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Signals
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concept of one-dimensional signals, particularly in the context of radio waves and electromagnetic (EM) waves. Participants argue that while radio signals may appear one-dimensional due to their lack of directionality in reception, they are fundamentally directional and influenced by reflections and obstacles. The conversation also touches on the nature of particle interactions, suggesting that true one-dimensional signals do not exist in nature, as all interactions are inherently directional. The insights draw from classical physics and quantum mechanics, referencing Feynman's work on photon propagation and particle interactions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electromagnetic wave properties
  • Familiarity with radio wave transmission and reception
  • Basic knowledge of quantum mechanics and particle interactions
  • Awareness of Feynman diagrams and their significance in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties of electromagnetic waves and their directional characteristics
  • Study Feynman diagrams and their application in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the differences between transverse and longitudinal waves
  • Investigate the impact of reflections and obstacles on radio signal transmission
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, electrical engineers, students of quantum mechanics, and anyone interested in the fundamental nature of signals and wave propagation.

  • #31
giann_tee said:
I doubt that anything is appropriate for this forum, including conversation. As you can see, we have some answers in between. Maybe you can fill in where my PhD was incomplete, please?

Best not go there, I think. I could be an eminent Surgeon but what I might write about Keynsian Economics could be total rubbish. What one writes here is one's only relevant qualification and, on this topic, your output is very fanciful and certainly not Physics as we know it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
sophiecentaur said:
Best not go there, I think. I could be an eminent Surgeon but what I might write about Keynsian Economics could be total rubbish. What one writes here is one's only relevant qualification and, on this topic, your output is very fanciful and certainly not Physics as we know it.

I think that it is a generous to be rich in contents, animate people and create something lasting. This is the kind of moderation I would do on my thread. There are many intuitive aspects of the topic, equivalences between abstract ideas, some of which possesses material links that can be qualified with further knowledge. Posts often tend to become one-liners. No problem there, but this constant forum-wide bickering about doing homework should stop, unless you want your purpose in life to be AUTOMATION in place of intelligent response.
 
  • #33
giann_tee said:
I think that it is a generous to be rich in contents, animate people and create something lasting. This is the kind of moderation I would do on my thread. There are many intuitive aspects of the topic, equivalences between abstract ideas, some of which possesses material links that can be qualified with further knowledge. Posts often tend to become one-liners. No problem there, but this constant forum-wide bickering about doing homework should stop, unless you want your purpose in life to be AUTOMATION in place of intelligent response.
I'm afraid that goes with the territory. If you want to have an informed opinion about a topic in Physics and to be sure you are understood then you need the knowledge and to use the accepted vocabulary. PF is pretty happy with the way it is, thank you. There are many other, less rigorous platforms where you can voice your opinions. I don't think you are likely to make this forum change to fit what you seem to require.
 
  • #34
This thread has changed directions so many times, even a GPS can't bring it back. It is done.

Zz.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
883
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 93 ·
4
Replies
93
Views
12K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K