Uncovering the Truth: Non-Dualistic Particles Revealed

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Liana008
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Particles
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of non-dualistic particles, specifically questioning which particles do not exhibit wave-particle duality. Participants explore the implications of dualistic character in the context of quantum mechanics, touching on historical developments and interpretations of particle behavior.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Historical
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that all particles exhibit wave-particle duality, questioning the validity of the original question.
  • One participant proposes that if "dualistic character" refers to antiparticles, then particles like the photon, Z boson, Higgs boson, and potentially Majorana neutrinos could be considered non-dualistic.
  • Another participant asserts that since 1925, there has been a consensus that wave-particle duality is not a valid concept, implying that no particles are dualistic.
  • A participant discusses the significance of DeBroglie's work and how it has been interpreted, suggesting that the notion of particles may be misleading and that only waves exist.
  • There is a mention of a 2011 experiment by Aephraim Steinberg that supports wave behavior in photons, although the implications of this experiment are debated.
  • One participant expresses interest in reconstructing the direction of light from detected momentum, indicating a curiosity about the experimental findings.
  • Another participant introduces the idea that only quantum fields exist, rejecting classical notions of particles and fields.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the nature of dualistic particles. Multiple competing views are presented regarding the interpretation of wave-particle duality and the implications of historical scientific developments.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference historical developments in quantum theory and the interpretations of various scientists, indicating that the discussion is influenced by differing perspectives on foundational concepts in quantum mechanics.

Liana008
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello, could you please help me with this question?
What particles do NOT have a dualistic character?
Thank you for your answer.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Liana008 said:
Hello, could you please help me with this question?
What particles do NOT have a dualistic character?
Thank you for your answer.
As in wave/particle dualistic nature (not in the classical sense, though)? I would think none.

Micro, and in principle macro, systems are all quantum mechanical.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Liana008
Normally "dualistic" would refer to wave / particle duality but the question makes no sense since all particles are dual in that sense.

Only way the question seems sensible, that I can see, is if "dualistic character" refers to antiparticles. Thus the electron has "dualistic character" because it has an antiparticle, the positron.

In that case the elementary particles which are their own antiparticle are photon, Z boson, Higgs boson, and graviton if it exists. Also if Majorana was right, neutrinos.

On the other hand, maybe these could be called dualistic, because they are their own antiparticle? If so all the other particles are the non-dualistic ones.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Liana008
Since 1925 it's clear that there is no wave-particle duality. So the answer is: none! ;-)).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Liana008 and weirdoguy
vanhees71 said:
Since 1925 it's clear that there is no wave-particle duality. So the answer is: none! ;-)).

What happened in 1925?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Liana008
ddd123 said:
What happened in 1925?
The modern form of quantum theory, still valid today, has been found by Heisenberg, Schrödinger, Dirac, and others!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Liana008
Thank you very much!
 
Difraction is the bending of wave rays when they meet an obstacle to propagation .

Suppose an wave propagating in a medium until it meet a slit in an opaque barrier.

In June 2011 Canadian scientist Aephraim Steinberg measured momentum and position of a photon, verifying that it comported itself as an wave even when passing by just on slit.

In 1924, Louis DeBroglie made an important discovery. Considering Einstein's relation

lambda = h/p ( is Plank's constant and p is momentum),

he demonstraded that the relation faculted the determination of the wave length of any material object. For this equation he earned the Nobel prize in 1929. The hypothesis was confirmed in 1927 by Clinton Davisson and Lester Germer.

Yet the habit of treating with corpuscles hinders until today that people understand that DeBroglie really has demonstrated particles inexistence. There is no duality, as generally affirmed, but only waves. A wave, as the photon, that manifests itself in a limited space, will seem to the observer a particle.

In June 2011 the Canadian scientist Aephraim Steinberg measured one photon both position and momentum, verifying that it behaves as an wave even when it traverses just one single slit (http://phys.org/news/2011-06-quantum-physics-photons-two-slit-interferometer.html).

Without minimize the importance of Prof. Steinberg's brilliant experiment, we could say that some works are not rigorously necessary.

Fernando Arthur Tollendal Pacheco – fernandoarthur@gmail.com
Fernando Antônio Bezerra Tollendal Pacheco - ftollendal@gmail.com
Brasilia (DF) - Brazil
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Liana008
Tollendal said:
In June 2011 the Canadian scientist Aephraim Steinberg measured one photon both position and momentum, verifying that it behaves as an wave even when it traverses just one single slit (http://phys.org/news/2011-06-quantum-physics-photons-two-slit-interferometer.html).

I was just wondering the other day whether it was theoretically possible to reconstruct from what direction light travels using its detected momentum. The article, however, doesn't mention the finding demonstrating anything about waves. I'm really interested in this. But when I clicked on the journal article, I can view only the abstract. Is there any way you can lend me your copy of the journal article to read if you have it?
 
  • #10
Tollendal said:
Yet the habit of treating with corpuscles hinders until today that people understand that DeBroglie really has demonstrated particles inexistence. There is no duality, as generally affirmed, but only waves. A wave, as the photon, that manifests itself in a limited space, will seem to the observer a particle.

I'm lovin' it! Is this a modern interpretation or did DeBroglie consciously put forth the above?
 
  • #11
I'd put it in a different way. There are neither classical particles nor classical fields but only quantum fields together with the Born rule intepreting quantum states in a probabilistic way. Only this description is free of inconsistencies.
 
  • #12
DavidReishi said:
I'm lovin' it! Is this a modern interpretation or did DeBroglie consciously put forth the above?
Definitely a modern interpretation... I wouldn't bet on de Broglie recognizing it himself.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K