Blackholes Forum Message Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
 Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...The Space and Astronomy Agora Well, That Is Not Correct. Strings Are Not The Only Game In Town Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response ToPosted by Alexander on May 25, 2001 03:23:34 UTC

For example, take two counter-propagating with speed of light c waves (say, e/m waves, or gravwaves) to make a standing wave. If you try to accelerate this standing wave, you get 2 doppler shifted waves (blue and red) which will beat with each other producing exactly what we know as a De Broigle frequency.

Apply force to accelerate a wave bunch - you'll find from the increased energy (=work=Fs) that F will be proportional to acceleration - so you'll get 2-nd Newton law (actually relativistic equivalent of it) with some proportionality factor which you can consider as "inertial mass". So, you "cooked" a massive particle.

Now, you may mix more than 2 waves. Regardless how many waves you mix, the result is always a bunch of few massive standing waves (= fermions?) and massless moving with c waves (bosons?).

Circular polarization of waves can be considered to be a spin (of that "particle").

Fourie relationship between lenght of wave bunch and wave number (the product should be equal 1)is what we actually call Heisenberg uncertainty principle. From that you can derive Shredinger equation and the rest of QM.

So, you can cook mass, spin, quantum behavior, and some other "tangible" physical properties of "particles" just out of massles waves (say, waves of space-time itself).

I personally feel that the idea that all "zoo" of particles is actually various "modes" or "types" of wave motion (of a single object like space-time or vacuum) makes some sense.

What do you think?