Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Matter theory

  1. Dec 17, 2004 #1
    just thought of this after watching a tv program on the origins of wave-particle duality discovery and the development of uncertainty theory. wonder if someone could bounce something back off me for it.

    now im not a physicist, im a computer science student, but i've read and watched a little on the general subject.

    so to me this sounds a little(lot) like some string theory but i'd appreciate a better perspective than my own.

    it seems to me, that things being 'wavey' and 'particley' are remarkably similar to my first experince with atomic bonding, and how ionic and covalent bonds are just 2 ends of the same stick(pardon my metaphor). could it be that all things are energy, and that this energy is in the form of some type of wave. and that a measure of how particle-like or wave-like a thing is, is simply determined by how much this wraps round on itself. in something like an electron its a bit more one way than another, and in an EM-wave its a bit more the other way etc.

    further thoughts on this concern the 'proof' of duality and that if you look for a wave you find a wave, and if you look for a particle you find a particle. could it be that for example in an electron microscope, the emission process doesnt simply 'fire' electrons from a 'gun', but those electrons are simply unravelled slightly more, changing their nature and allowing them to travel through the 'vacuum' and the receiving process coils them up slightly more.

    the thing that bugs me about it, is if things can travel in a wave, surely they have a medium. and since current theories on ether arent going anywhere(that i konw of) what is the medium for these waves.
    *further thought... maybe the cosmic background radiation is the medium, and these waves interacting along it is what causes it to be at 3 degrees Kelvin.

    i'd love to get some thoughts from some actual physicists back on this, so please consider replying :)

    btw google search for 'waveicle' its interesting reading, yet way over my head ie. it has number and fractions etc. :p
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2004
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 18, 2004 #2
    Welcome to the forums!

    The cosmic background radiation is "the waves" itself, not a medium on which other waves (?) travel. The CBR isn't any different than any other electromagnetic waves. Asking in what medium the CBR travels makes more sense, but as we know, such a medium is a hypothesis that has never been observed.

    Your other speculations don't seem necessarily wrong, right or new. Words like "wrap around" and "unravel" are rather fuzzy, and don't have much meaning by themselves.
  4. Dec 18, 2004 #3
    Re: good?

    Nice ideas it's good to think about what it is we are being asked to accept even if you are wrong, someone might have an idea based on your posts, keep thinking outside the envelope, this forum get's more interesting everyday, thanks everyone :biggrin:
  5. Dec 21, 2004 #4
    i'll try to explain myself further on the wrap around unravel bit
    imagine a wave travelling over water, the waves ends are in front of the middle causing it to curve in on itself, but as long as the edges are travelling at the same speed as the middle it maintains that curvature. if something were to cause the edges of the wave to slow down or speed up, or similarly the middle of it to slow down or speed up, the shape of the wave itself would change, either becoming more spread out so that it is maybe travelling in a straight line, or more curled up such that it coils in on itself more.
    as long as the direction of travel is maintained along the entire wave the shape would remain constant and yet be able to change completely in shape.

    thats how i see it somewhat at least.
  6. Dec 21, 2004 #5


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    Please note that in physics (and mathematics), when we use the word "wave", we mean that it is the solution to the wave equation, something that has the form of

    [tex]\nabla^2 \psi = k \frac{\partial^2 \psi}{\partial t^2}[/tex]

    It is why the solution to the Schrodinger equation is called a "wavefunction", because the Schrodinger equation has this form. It is also why light was thought to be a wave, because you can combine 2 of Maxwell's equation into a 2nd order diff. equation and also get this form.

    If you modify your "wave", then unless you make the corresponding changes in the diff. equation, then what you have is not a wave in the strict sense. It cannot be described and the mechanics of it isn't known, since the differential equation that describes it (frankly, the equation that is the STARTING POINT) isn't known. So unless you're willing to put in the effort of figuring out what is important and where to start, what you are doing will appear vague and not have any clear significance.

    On an unrelated note, to respond to an "advice" you got here, to be able to work "outside the envelope", one must first learn what the envelope is. Without that, one can't tell if one is merely stuck inside a paper bag.

    Last edited: Dec 21, 2004
  7. Dec 27, 2004 #6
    can someone put what zapper just said into lamens for me please :)
  8. Dec 27, 2004 #7
    Zappers answer...

    ... seemed clear enough to me. He suggested you need to read more on the subject and more importantly, explained why...

    I hope he, or someone, will do me the same courtesy.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?