How Do Particle Spins Reflect Their Wave Characteristics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter and7barton
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Particles Waves
and7barton
Messages
27
Reaction score
4
My question concerns Particle / Wave duality.
Being a musician, I find it easier to visualise these things in their Wave aspect.
I visualise these waves as on a frequency spectrum, and I think a good analogy is to picture them as harmonics blown on some cosmic "Trumpet". It requires more energy to blow the next harmonic up in the scale... I also have the feeling that there is no ultimate upper limit to the spectrum of harmonics. Each subsequent harmonic in the rising scale requires more and more energy to energise it. The particles are visualised as getting smaller and smaller, but their wave aspect gets higher and higher in frequency.
Am I on the right track here, visualising it in this way ?
My question is - if these energies can be construed as being both a particle and a wave, then how are the different spins of particles and other individual characteristics of any specific particle, reflected in their wave aspect ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Am I on the right track here, visualising it in this way ?
No. You are still thinking in terms of classical waves - it's a start because it gives you a chunk of the math and helps you understand a lot of the odd stuff. But it will lead you astray too. Treat it as a metaphor.

My question is - if these energies can be construed as being both a particle and a wave, then how are the different spins of particles and other individual characteristics of any specific particle, reflected in their wave aspect ?
Spins, for instance, are just additional angular momentum added to the overall wave ... your classical picture would add them as additional wobbles in the wave-form. But like I said, this is a misleading picture. The characteristics associated with classical particles cannot be represented in the wave aspect - that's why there is a duality.

In the end these objects are not particles and they are not waves. They are a different class of objects with their own mathematics.

But to give you an idea - it makes as much sense to say something has wave-particle duality as it does to say an elephant has trunk-tail duality. It is true that an elephant, viewed one way may have the properties of a tail, and, viewed another way, may have the properties of a trunk - but that is to miss out a whole lot of elephant.

Also see:
http://vega.org.uk/video/subseries/8/
... Feynman's classic lecture series deals with quantum electrodynamics and covers the concepts you are wrestling with in context.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
Back
Top