Do one-dimensional signals truly exist?

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

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of one-dimensional signals in nature, particularly in the context of radio waves and electromagnetic transmissions. Participants explore the nature of these signals, their directionality, and how they interact with the environment, touching on theoretical and practical implications.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that radio signals can be considered "one-dimensional" due to their lack of directionality and shape, as they are perceived as oscillations affecting the receiving antenna regardless of its position.
  • Others argue that electromagnetic waves, including radio waves, inherently possess directionality and are influenced by reflections and obstacles in urban environments.
  • A participant reflects on Feynman's work, suggesting that interactions at the quantum level involve directional exchanges and that particles do not interact in a purely one-dimensional manner.
  • There is a mention of the complexity of interactions at the atomic level, where multiple particles and fields contribute to the behavior of matter, challenging the notion of one-dimensionality.
  • One participant questions whether the discussion relates to concepts like polarization or longitudinal waves, indicating a potential link to different types of wave behavior.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the existence and nature of one-dimensional signals. While some support the idea of one-dimensionality in certain contexts, others emphasize the directional characteristics of electromagnetic waves and the complexity of particle interactions, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight various assumptions regarding the definitions of one-dimensionality and the nature of signals, as well as the influence of environmental factors on signal reception. The discussion also touches on the limitations of simplifying complex interactions into one-dimensional models.

  • #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
7K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · 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
13K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K