particles like protons and maybe photons, they are always spherical why? do they create a gravitational field?
This basically sums it up. They're drawn as spherical objects because that's a convenient way to learn about them. When I draw a car for an example on kinematic motion, I would probably just draw a box with a couple of circles underneath. The shape is inconsequential. The idea is the same for things like photons and protons (although I never do see photons as spheres). The shape isn't important in examples where people are typically drawing protons.I think they are drawn spherically just so we have something to picture. Remember that protons are actually made up of quarks so they probably aren't spherical, it's a simplification.
This is not true at all. Photons are best described as traveling waves.jetwaterluffy said:Who said they were? Photons aren't really particles, though, and if they are, they are points, rather than spheres.
This is not true at all that this is not true at all.This is not true at all. Photons are best described as traveling waves.
Sure, it can be more convenient that talking about them as point-like objects but this doesn't make it true. The proton is not a point-like object, but when it will make no consequence, we consider it a point particle. With light, yes, you will treat it as point-like particles but only in a regime where treating them as such has no consequences just like doing the same with protons is an acceptable choice. I'm just saying in reality, they're not, just like protons are not point-like. Using them differently in a model is fine by me, I don't mean to take issue with that.This is not true at all that this is not true at all.
Photons are best described as whichever model (particle or wave) best suits the need at-hand. Sometimes it makes more sense to imagine a photon as a particle. And considering the OP's question, clearly he is asking about examples where they are described or illustrated as particles.