By definition, Quantum physics is a branch of theoretical physics that studies quantum-mechanical and quantum-field systems and the laws of their motion. The basic laws of quantum physics are studied within the framework of quantum mechanics and quantum field theory and are applied in other branches of physics. Quantum physics and its main theories - quantum mechanics, quantum field theory - were created in the first half of the 20th century by many scientists, including Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Arthur Compton, Louis de Broglie, Niels Bohr, Erwin Schrödinger, Paul Dirac, Wolfgang Pauli .Quantum physics combines several branches of physics, in which the phenomena of quantum mechanics and quantum field theory play a fundamental role, manifesting themselves at the level of the microcosm, but also having (importantly) consequences at the level of the macrocosm.
These include:
quantum mechanics;
quantum field theory - and its applications: nuclear physics, elementary particle physics, high energy physics;
quantum statistical physics;
quantum theory of condensed matter;
quantum theory of a solid body;
quantum optics.
The very term Quantum (from Latin quantum - “how much”) is an indivisible portion of any quantity in physics. The concept is based on the idea of quantum mechanics that some physical quantities can only take certain values (they say that a physical quantity is quantized). In some important particular cases, this value or the step of its change can only be an integer multiple of some of fundamental importance- and the latter is called a quantum.
The quanta of some fields have special names:
photon - quantum electro magnetic field;
gluon - a quantum of a vector (gluon) field in quantum chromodynamics (provides strong interaction);
graviton - a hypothetical quantum of the gravitational field;
phonon - quantum of vibrational motion of crystal atoms.
In general, Quantization is a procedure for constructing something using a discrete set of quantities, for example, integers,
as opposed to constructing using a continuous set of quantities, such as real numbers.
In physics:
Quantization - construction of a quantum version of some non-quantum (classical) theory or physical model
according to the facts of quantum physics.
Feynman quantization - quantization in terms of functional integrals.
Second quantization is a method for describing multiparticle quantum mechanical systems.
Dirac quantization
Geometric quantization
In computer science and electronics:
Quantization is the division of a range of values of a certain quantity into a finite number of intervals.
Quantization noise - errors that occur when digitizing an analog signal.
In music:
Note quantization - moving notes to the nearest beats in the sequencer.
It should be noted that, despite a number of certain successes in describing the nature of many phenomena and processes occurring in the world around us, today quantum physics, together with the entire complex of its subdisciplines, is not an integral, complete concept, and although it was initially understood that it was within the framework of quantum physics, a single integral, consistent and explaining all known phenomena discipline will be built, today it is not such, for example, quantum physics is not able to explain the principles and present a working model of gravity, although no one doubts that gravity is one of the fundamental basic laws of the universe, and the impossibility of explaining it from the point of view of quantum approaches only says that they are imperfect, and are not a complete and final truth in the last instance.
Moreover, within quantum physics itself there are different currents and directions, representatives of each of which offer their own explanations for phenomenological experiments that do not have an unambiguous interpretation. Within quantum physics itself, the scientists representing it do not have a common opinion and common understanding, often their interpretations and explanations of the same phenomena are even opposite to each other. And the reader should understand that quantum physics itself is only an intermediate concept, a set of methods, approaches and algorithms that make it up, and it may well turn out that after a while a much more complete, perfect and consistent concept will be developed, with other approaches and other methods. Nevertheless, the reader will certainly be interested in the main phenomena that are the subject of study of quantum physics, and which, when the models explaining them are combined into a single system, may well become the basis for a completely new scientific paradigm. So here are the events:
1. Corpuscular-wave dualism.
Initially, it was assumed that wave-particle duality is characteristic only for photons of light, which in some cases
behave like a stream of particles, and in others like waves. But many experiments of quantum physics have shown that this behavior is characteristic not only for photons, but also for any particles, including those that make up physically dense matter. One of the most famous experiments in this area is the experiment with two slits, when a stream of electrons was directed onto a plate in which there were two parallel narrow slits, behind the plate there was an electron-impervious screen on which it was possible to see exactly what patterns appeared on it. from electrons. And in some cases, this picture consisted of two parallel strips, the same as two slots on the plate in front of the screen, which characterized the behavior of the electron beam, sort of like a stream of small balls, but in other cases, a pattern was formed on the screen that is characteristic of wave interference (many parallel stripes, with the thickest in the center, and thinner at the edges). When trying to investigate the process in more detail, it turned out that one electron can both pass through only one slit, and through two slits at the same time, which is completely excluded if the electron were only a solid particle. In fact, at present there is already a point of view, although not proven, but apparently very close to the truth, and of tremendous importance from the point of view of the worldview, that the electron is in fact neither a wave nor a particle, but is interweaving of primary energies, or matters, twisted together and circulating in a certain orbit, and in some cases demonstrating the properties of a wave. and in some, the properties of the particle.
Many ordinary people understand very poorly, but what is the electron cloud surrounding the atom, which was described in
school, well, what is it, a cloud of electrons, that is, that there are a lot of them, these electrons, no, not like that, the cloud is the same electron,
it’s just that it’s sort of smeared in orbit, like a drop, and when trying to determine its exact location, you always have to use
probabilistic approaches, since, although a huge number of experiments have been carried out, it has never been possible to establish exactly where the electron is in orbit at a given moment in time, it can only be determined with a certain probability. And this is all for the same reason that the electron is not a solid particle, and depict it as in school textbooks, like a solid ball circling in orbit, is fundamentally wrong and forms an erroneous idea in children about how processes actually occur in nature at the micro level, everywhere around us, including ourselves.
2. The relationship between the observed and the observer, the influence of the observer on the observed.
In the same experiments with a plate with two slits and a screen, and in similar ones, it was unexpectedly found that the behavior of electrons as a wave and as a particle was in a completely measurable dependence on whether a direct scientist-observer was present in the experiment or not, and if was present, what expectations did he have from the results of the experiment!
When the observing scientist expected the electrons to behave like particles, they behaved like particles, but when the scientist who expected to behave like waves took his place, the electrons behaved like a stream of waves! The expectation of the observer directly affects the result of the experiment, although not in all cases, but in a completely measurable percentage of experiments! It is important, very important to understand that the observed experiment and the observer himself are not something separated from each other, but are part of one single system, no matter what walls stand between them. It is extremely important to realize that the whole process of our life is a continuous and unceasing observation,
for other people, phenomena and objects, and for oneself. And although the expectation of the observable does not always accurately determine the result of the action,
besides this, there are many other factors, however, the influence of this is very noticeable.
Let's remember how many times in our lives there have been situations when a person does some business, another approaches him and begins to carefully observe him, and at that moment this person either makes a mistake or some involuntary action. And many are familiar with this elusive feeling, when you do some action, they begin to carefully observe you, and as a result, you stop being able to do this action, although you did it quite successfully before the appearance of the observer.
And now let's remember that most people are educated and raised, both in schools and in institutes, that everything around, and physically dense matter, and all objects, and ourselves, consist of atoms, and atoms consist of nuclei and revolving around them. electrons, and the nuclei are protons and neutrons, and all these are such hard balls that are interconnected different types chemical bonds, and it is the types of these bonds that determine the nature and properties of the substance. And about the possible behavior of particles from the point of view of waves, and hence all the objects of which these particles are composed, and ourselves,
nobody speaks! Most do not know this, do not believe in it and do not use it! That is, it expects behavior from the surrounding objects precisely as a set of solid particles. Well, they behave and behave like a set of particles in different combinations. Almost no one expects the behavior of an object made of physically dense matter, like a stream of waves, it seems impossible common sense, although there are no fundamental obstacles to this, and all because incorrect and erroneous models and understanding of the world around are laid in people from childhood, as a result, when a person grows up, he does not use these opportunities, he does not even know that they exist. How can you use what you don't know. And since there are billions of such unbelieving and unknowing people on the planet, it is quite possible that the totality public consciousness all people of the earth, as a kind of average for a hospital, defines as the default device of the world around as a set of particles, building blocks, and nothing more (after all, according to one of the models, all of humanity is a huge collection of observers).
3. Quantum nonlocality and quantum entanglement.
One of the cornerstone and defining concepts of quantum physics is quantum nonlocality and quantum entanglement directly related to it, or quantum entanglement, which is basically the same thing. Striking examples of quantum entanglement are, for example, the experiments carried out by Alain Aspect, in which the polarization of photons emitted by the same source and received by two different receivers was carried out. And it turned out that if you change the polarization (spin orientation) of one photon, the polarization of the second photon changes at the same time, and vice versa, and this change in polarization occurs instantly, regardless of the distance at which these photons are from each other. It looks as if two photons emitted by one source are interconnected, although there is no obvious spatial connection between them, and a change in the parameters of one photon instantly leads to a change in the parameters of another photon. It is important to understand that the phenomenon of quantum entanglement, or entanglement, is true not only for the micro, but also for the macro level.
One of the first demonstrative experiments in this area was the experiment of Russian (then still Soviet) torsion physicists.
The scheme of the experiment was as follows: they took a piece of the most ordinary brown coal mined in mines for burning in boiler houses, and sawed it into 2 parts. Since mankind has been familiar with coal for a very long time, it is a very well-studied object, both in terms of its physical and chemical properties, molecular bonds, heat released during combustion per unit volume, and so on. So, one piece of this coal remained in the laboratory in Kyiv, the second piece of coal was taken to the laboratory in Krakow. Each of these pieces, in turn, was cut into 2 identical parts, the result was - 2 identical pieces of the same coal were in Kyiv, and 2 identical pieces were in Krakow. Then they took one piece each in Kyiv and Krakow, and simultaneously burned both of them, and measured the amount of heat released during combustion. It turned out to be about the same, as expected. Then, a piece of coal in Kyiv was irradiated with a torsion generator (the one in Krakow was not irradiated with anything), and again both of these pieces were burned. And this time both of these pieces gave the effect of about 15% more heat when burned than when burning the first two pieces. The increase in heat release during the combustion of coal in Kyiv was understandable, because it was affected by radiation, as a result, its physical structure changed, which caused an increase in heat release during combustion by about 15%. But that piece, which was in Krakow, also increased heat release by 15%, although it was not irradiated with anything! This piece of coal also changed its physical properties, although it was not it that was irradiated, but another piece (with which they were once part of one whole, which is a fundamentally important point for understanding the essence), and the distance of 2000 km between these pieces was absolutely not obstacle, changes in the structure of both pieces of coal occurred instantly, which was established by repeated repetition of the experiment. But you need to understand that this process is not necessarily true only for coal, you can use any other material, and the effect, quite expectedly, will be exactly the same!
That is, quantum entanglement and quantum nonlocality are also valid in the macroscopic world, and not only in the microcosm of elementary particles - in general, this is quite true, because all macro objects consist of these very elementary particles!
In fairness, it should be noted that torsion physicists considered many quantum phenomena to be a manifestation of torsion fields, and some quantum physicists, on the contrary, considered torsion fields to be a special case of manifestation of quantum effects. Which, in general, is not surprising, because both of them study and explore the same world around, with the same universal laws, both at the micro and at the macro level,
and let them use different approaches and different terminology when explaining phenomena, the essence is still the same.
But is this phenomenon valid only for inanimate objects, what is the situation with living organisms, is it possible to detect similar effects there?
It turned out that yes, and one of those who proved it was the American doctor Cleve Baxter. Initially, this scientist specialized in testing a polygraph, that is, a device, a lie detector, used to interrogate subjects in the CIA laboratories. A number of successful experiments were carried out to register and establish different emotional states among the interrogated, depending on the polygraph readings, and effective techniques were developed, which are still used today for interrogations through a lie detector. Over time, the doctor's interests expanded, and he began experiments with plants and animals. Among a number of very interesting results, one should be singled out, which is directly related to quantum entanglement and quantum nonlocality, namely the following - living cells were taken from the participant of the experiment from the mouth and placed in a test tube (it is known that the cells taken for the sample
people live for a few more hours), this test tube was connected to a polygraph. Then the person from whom this sample was taken traveled several tens or even hundreds of kilometers, and experienced various stressful situations there. Over the years of research, Cleve Baxter has studied well which polygraph readings corresponded to certain stressful human conditions. A strict protocol was kept, where the time of getting into stressful situations was clearly recorded, and a protocol was also kept for recording the readings of a polygraph connected to a test tube with still living cells. synchronicity between the entry of a person into stressful situation and an almost simultaneous reaction of cells in the form of corresponding polygraph graphs! That is, although the cells taken from a person for a test and the person himself were separated in space, there was still a connection between them, and a change in the emotional and mental state of a person was almost immediately reflected in cell reactions in vitro.
The result was repeated many times, there were attempts to install lead screens in order to isolate the test tube with a polygraph, but this did not help,
all the same, even behind the lead screen there was an almost synchronous registration of changes in states.
That is, quantum entanglement and quantum non-locality are true for both inanimate and living nature, moreover, this is a completely natural natural phenomenon that occurs all around us! I think that many readers are interested, and even more than that, is it possible to travel not only in space, but also in time, maybe there are some experiments confirming this, and probably quantum entanglement and quantum nonlocality can help here? It turned out that such experiments exist! One of them was carried out by the famous Soviet astrophysicist Nikolai Aleksandrovich Kozyrev, and it consisted in the following. Everyone knows that the position of the star that we see in the sky is not true, because for those thousands of years that the light flies from the star to us, she herself has already shifted during this time, to a completely measurable distance. Knowing the calculated trajectory of a star, one can guess where it should be now, and moreover, one can calculate where it should be in the future at the next time (in a time period equal to the time it takes for light to travel from us to this star), if we approximate the trajectory of its movement. And with the help of a telescope of a special design (reflex telescope), it was confirmed that not only there is a type of signals,
propagating through the universe almost instantly, regardless of the distance of thousands of light years (in fact, "smearing" in space, like an electron in orbit), but it is also possible to register a signal from the future position of the star, that is, the position in which it is not yet, She won't be there anytime soon! And it is at this calculated point of the trajectory. Here the assumption inevitably arises that, like an electron "smeared" along the orbit, and being essentially a quantum-non-local object, a star rotating around the center of the galaxy, like an electron around the nucleus of an atom, also has some similar properties. And also, this experiment proves the possibility of transmitting signals not only in space, but also in time. This experiment is quite actively discredited in the media,
with the attribution of mythical and mystical properties to it, but it should be noted that it was also repeated after the death of Kozyrev at two different laboratory bases, by two independent groups of scientists, one in Novosibirsk (led by Academician Lavrentiev), and the second in Ukraine, by the Kukoch research group , moreover, on different stars, and everywhere the same results were obtained, confirming Kozyrev's research! In fairness, it is worth noting that both in electrical engineering and in radio engineering there are cases when, under certain conditions, the signal is received by the receiver a few moments before it was emitted by the source. This fact, as a rule, was ignored and taken as a mistake, and unfortunately, often, it seems that scientists simply did not have the courage to call black black and white white, just because it is allegedly impossible and cannot be.
Have there been other similar experiments that would confirm this conclusion? It turns out that they were Doctor of Medical Sciences, Academician Vlail Petrovich Kaznacheev. Operators were trained, one of which was located in Novosibirsk, and the second - in the north, on Dikson. A system of symbols was developed, well learned and assimilated by both operators. At the specified time, with the help of Kozyrev's mirrors, a signal was transmitted from one operator to another, and the receiving party did not know in advance which of the characters would be sent. A strict protocol was kept, which recorded the time of sending and receiving characters. And after checking the protocols, it turned out that some characters were received almost simultaneously with sending, some were received late, which seems to be possible and quite natural, but some characters were accepted by the operator BEFORE they were sent! That is, in fact, they were sent from the future to the past. These experiments still do not have a strictly official scientific explanation, but it is obvious that they are of the same nature. Based on them, it can be assumed with a sufficient degree of accuracy that quantum entanglement and quantum nonlocality are not only possible, but also exist not only in space, but also in time!
I think it's safe to say that no one understands quantum mechanics.
Physicist Richard Feynman
It is no exaggeration to say that the invention of semiconductor devices was a revolution. Not only is this an impressive technological achievement, but it also paved the way for events that will forever change modern society. Semiconductor devices are used in all kinds of microelectronic devices, including computers, certain types of medical diagnostic and treatment equipment, and popular telecommunications devices.
But behind this technological revolution is even more, a revolution in general science: area quantum theory. Without this leap in understanding the natural world, the development of semiconductor devices (and more advanced electronic devices under development) would never have succeeded. Quantum physics is an incredibly complex branch of science. This chapter only provides a brief overview. When scientists like Feynman say "no one understands [it]", you can be sure that this is a really difficult topic. Without a basic understanding of quantum physics or, according to at least, understanding scientific discoveries that led to their development, it is impossible to understand how and why semiconductor electronic devices work. Most electronics textbooks try to explain semiconductors in terms of "classical physics", making them even more confusing to understand as a result.
Many of us have seen atomic model diagrams that look like the picture below.
Rutherford atom: negative electrons revolve around a small positive nucleus
Tiny particles of matter called protons And neutrons, make up the center of the atom; electrons revolve like planets around a star. The nucleus carries a positive electrical charge due to the presence of protons (neutrons have no electrical charge), while the balancing negative charge of an atom resides in the orbiting electrons. Negative electrons are attracted to positive protons like planets are attracted to the Sun, but the orbits are stable due to the movement of electrons. We owe this popular model of the atom to the work of Ernest Rutherford, who experimentally determined around 1911 that the positive charges of atoms are concentrated in a tiny, dense nucleus, and not evenly distributed along the diameter, as explorer J. J. Thomson had previously assumed.
Rutherford's scattering experiment consists of bombarding a thin gold foil with positively charged alpha particles, as shown in the figure below. Young graduate students H. Geiger and E. Marsden got unexpected results. The trajectory of some alpha particles was deviated by a large angle. Some alpha particles were scattered into reverse direction at an angle of almost 180°. Most of the particles passed through the gold foil without changing their trajectory, as if there was no foil at all. The fact that several alpha particles experienced large deviations in their trajectory indicates the presence of nuclei with a small positive charge.
Rutherford scattering: a beam of alpha particles is scattered by thin gold foil Although Rutherford's model of the atom was supported by experimental data better than Thomson's, it was still imperfect. Further attempts were made to determine the structure of the atom, and these efforts helped pave the way for the strange discoveries of quantum physics. Today our understanding of the atom is a bit more complex. Yet despite the revolution of quantum physics and its contributions to our understanding of the structure of the atom, Rutherford's depiction of the solar system as the structure of an atom has taken root in popular consciousness to the extent that it persists in educational fields, even if it is misplaced.
Consider it short description electrons in an atom, taken from a popular electronics textbook:
The spinning negative electrons are attracted to the positive nucleus, which leads us to the question of why the electrons don't fly into the nucleus of the atom. The answer is that the rotating electrons remain in their stable orbit due to two equal but opposite forces. The centrifugal force acting on the electrons is directed outward, and the attractive force of the charges is trying to pull the electrons towards the nucleus.
In accordance with Rutherford's model, the author considers electrons to be solid pieces of matter occupying round orbits, their inward attraction to the oppositely charged nucleus is balanced by their movement. The use of the term "centrifugal force" is technically incorrect (even for orbiting planets), but this is easily forgiven due to the popular acceptance of the model: in fact, there is no such thing as force, repulsiveany rotating body from the center of its orbit. This seems to be so because the body's inertia tends to keep it moving in a straight line, and since the orbit is a constant deviation (acceleration) from rectilinear motion, there is a constant inertial reaction to any force that attracts the body to the center of the orbit (centripetal), whether either gravity, electrostatic attraction, or even the tension of a mechanical bond.
However, the real problem with this explanation in the first place is the idea of electrons moving in circular orbits. A proven fact that accelerated electric charges emit electromagnetic radiation, this fact was known even in Rutherford's time. Because rotary motion is a form of acceleration (a rotating object in constant acceleration, pulling the object away from its normal rectilinear motion), the electrons in the rotating state should emit radiation like mud from a spinning wheel. Electrons accelerated along circular paths in particle accelerators called synchrotrons are known to do this, and the result is called synchrotron radiation. If electrons were to lose energy in this way, their orbits would eventually be disrupted, and as a result they would collide with a positively charged nucleus. However, inside atoms this usually does not happen. Indeed, electronic "orbits" are surprisingly stable over a wide range of conditions.
In addition, experiments with "excited" atoms have shown that electromagnetic energy is emitted by an atom only at certain frequencies. Atoms are "excited" by external influences such as light, known to absorb energy and return electromagnetic waves at certain frequencies, much like a tuning fork that does not ring at a certain frequency until it is struck. When the light emitted by an excited atom is divided by a prism into its component frequencies (colors), individual lines of colors in the spectrum are found, the spectral line pattern is unique to a chemical element. This phenomenon is commonly used to identify chemical elements, and even to measure the proportions of each element in a compound or chemical mixture. According to solar system Rutherford's atomic model (relative to electrons, as pieces of matter, freely rotating in an orbit with some radius) and the laws of classical physics, excited atoms must return energy in an almost infinite frequency range, and not at selected frequencies. In other words, if Rutherford's model was correct, then there would be no "tuning fork" effect, and the color spectrum emitted by any atom would appear as a continuous band of colors, rather than as several separate lines.
Bohr's model of the hydrogen atom (with the orbits drawn to scale) assumes that electrons are only in discrete orbits. Electrons moving from n=3,4,5 or 6 to n=2 are displayed on a series of Balmer spectral lines A researcher named Niels Bohr tried to improve Rutherford's model after studying it in Rutherford's laboratory for several months in 1912. Trying to reconcile the results of other physicists (notably Max Planck and Albert Einstein), Bohr suggested that each electron had a certain, specific amount of energy, and that their orbits were distributed in such a way that each of them could occupy certain places around the nucleus, like balls. , fixed on circular paths around the nucleus, and not as free-moving satellites, as previously assumed (figure above). In deference to the laws of electromagnetism and accelerating charges, Bohr referred to "orbits" as stationary states to avoid the interpretation that they were mobile.
Although Bohr's ambitious attempt to rethink the structure of the atom, which was more consistent with experimental data, was a milestone in physics, it was not completed. His mathematical analysis predicted the results of experiments better than analyzes performed according to previous models, but there were still unanswered questions about whether why the electrons must behave in such a strange way. The statement that electrons existed in stationary quantum states around the nucleus correlated better with experimental data than Rutherford's model, but did not say what causes the electrons to take on these special states. The answer to this question was to come from another physicist, Louis de Broglie, some ten years later.
De Broglie suggested that electrons, like photons (particles of light), have both the properties of particles and the properties of waves. Based on this assumption, he suggested that the analysis of rotating electrons in terms of waves is better than in terms of particles, and can give more insight into their quantum nature. Indeed, another breakthrough was made in understanding.
A string vibrating at a resonant frequency between two fixed points forms a standing wave The atom, according to de Broglie, consisted of standing waves, a phenomenon well known to physicists in various forms. Like the plucked string of a musical instrument (pictured above), vibrating at a resonant frequency, with "knots" and "anti-knots" in stable places along its length. De Broglie imagined electrons around atoms as waves curved into a circle (figure below).
"Rotating" electrons like a standing wave around the nucleus, (a) two cycles in an orbit, (b) three cycles in an orbit Electrons can only exist in certain, specific "orbits" around the nucleus, because they are the only distances where the ends of the wave coincide. At any other radius, the wave will collide destructively with itself and thus cease to exist.
De Broglie's hypothesis provided both a mathematical framework and a convenient physical analogy to explain the quantum states of electrons within an atom, but his model of the atom was still incomplete. For several years, physicists Werner Heisenberg and Erwin Schrödinger, working independently, have been working on de Broglie's concept of wave-particle duality in order to create more rigorous mathematical models of subatomic particles.
This theoretical advance from de Broglie's primitive standing wave model to the Heisenberg matrix and differential equation Schrödinger was given the name quantum mechanics, it introduced a rather shocking characteristic to the world of subatomic particles: a sign of probability, or uncertainty. According to the new quantum theory, it was impossible to determine the exact position and exact momentum of a particle at one moment. A popular explanation for this "uncertainty principle" was that there was a measurement error (that is, by trying to accurately measure the position of an electron, you interfere with its momentum, and therefore cannot know what it was before you started measuring the position, and vice versa). The sensational conclusion of quantum mechanics is that particles do not have exact positions and momenta, and because of the relationship of these two quantities, their combined uncertainty will never decrease below a certain minimum value.
This form of "uncertainty" connection also exists in fields other than quantum mechanics. As discussed in the "Mixed Frequency AC Signals" chapter in Volume 2 of this book series, there are mutually exclusive relationships between the confidence in the time domain data of a waveform and its frequency domain data. Simply put, the more we know its component frequencies, the less accurately we know its amplitude over time, and vice versa. Quoting myself:
A signal of infinite duration (an infinite number of cycles) can be analyzed with absolute accuracy, but the fewer cycles available to the computer for analysis, the less accurate the analysis ... The fewer periods of the signal, the less accurate its frequency. Taking this concept to its logical extreme, a short pulse (not even a full period of a signal) doesn't really have a defined frequency, it's an infinite range of frequencies. This principle is common to all wave phenomena, and not only to variable voltages and currents.
To accurately determine the amplitude of a changing signal, we must measure it in a very short amount of time. However, doing this limits our knowledge of the frequency of the wave (a wave in quantum mechanics does not have to be similar to a sinusoidal wave; such similarity is a special case). On the other hand, in order to determine the frequency of a wave with great accuracy, we must measure it over a large number of periods, which means that we will lose sight of its amplitude at any given moment. Thus, we cannot simultaneously know the instantaneous amplitude and all frequencies of any wave with unlimited accuracy. Another oddity, this uncertainty is much greater than the inaccuracy of the observer; it is in the very nature of the wave. This is not the case, although it would be possible, given the appropriate technology, to provide accurate measurements of both instantaneous amplitude and frequency simultaneously. In a literal sense, a wave cannot have the exact instantaneous amplitude and the exact frequency at the same time.
The minimum uncertainty of particle position and momentum expressed by Heisenberg and Schrödinger has nothing to do with a limitation in measurement; rather, it is an intrinsic property of the nature of the wave-particle duality of the particle. Therefore, electrons do not actually exist in their "orbits" as well-defined particles of matter, or even as well-defined waveforms, but rather as "clouds" - a technical term. wave function probability distributions, as if each electron were "scattered" or "smeared" over a range of positions and momenta.
This radical view of electrons as indeterminate clouds initially contradicts the original principle of the quantum states of electrons: electrons exist in discrete, definite "orbits" around the nucleus of an atom. This new view, after all, was the discovery that led to the formation and explanation of quantum theory. How strange it seems that a theory created to explain the discrete behavior of electrons ends up declaring that electrons exist as "clouds" and not as separate pieces of matter. However, the quantum behavior of electrons does not depend on electrons having certain values of coordinates and momentum, but on other properties called quantum numbers. In essence, quantum mechanics dispenses with the common concepts of absolute position and absolute moment, and replaces them with absolute concepts of types that have no analogues in common practice.
Even though electrons are known to exist in disembodied, "cloudy" forms of distributed probability, rather than separate pieces of matter, these "clouds" have slightly different characteristics. Any electron in an atom can be described by four numerical measures (the quantum numbers mentioned earlier), called main (radial), orbital (azimuth), magnetic And spin numbers. Below is a brief overview of the meaning of each of these numbers:
Principal (radial) quantum number: denoted by a letter n, this number describes the shell on which the electron resides. The electron "shell" is a region of space around the nucleus of an atom in which electrons can exist, corresponding to de Broglie and Bohr's stable "standing wave" models. Electrons can "jump" from shell to shell, but cannot exist between them.
The principal quantum number must be a positive integer (greater than or equal to 1). In other words, the principal quantum number of an electron cannot be 1/2 or -3. These integers were not chosen arbitrarily, but through experimental evidence of the light spectrum: the different frequencies (colors) of light emitted by excited hydrogen atoms follow a mathematical relationship depending on specific integer values, as shown in the figure below.
Each shell has the ability to hold multiple electrons. An analogy for electron shells is the concentric rows of seats in an amphitheater. Just as a person sitting in an amphitheater must choose a row to sit down (he cannot sit between the rows), electrons must "choose" a particular shell in order to "sit down". Like rows in an amphitheatre, the outer shells hold more electrons than the shells closer to the center. Also, the electrons tend to find the smallest available shell, just as people in an amphitheater look for the place closest to the central stage. The higher the shell number, the more energy the electrons have on it.
The maximum number of electrons that any shell can hold is described by the equation 2n 2 , where n is the principal quantum number. Thus, the first shell (n = 1) can contain 2 electrons; the second shell (n = 2) - 8 electrons; and the third shell (n = 3) - 18 electrons (figure below).
The main quantum number n and the maximum number of electrons are related by the formula 2(n 2). Orbits are not to scale. The electron shells in the atom were denoted by letters rather than numbers. The first shell (n = 1) was designated K, the second shell (n = 2) L, the third shell (n = 3) M, the fourth shell (n = 4) N, the fifth shell (n = 5) O, the sixth shell ( n = 6) P, and the seventh shell (n = 7) B.
Orbital (azimuth) quantum number: a shell composed of subshells. Some may find it more convenient to think of subshells as simple sections of shells, like lanes dividing a road. Subshells are much weirder. Subshells are regions of space where electron "clouds" can exist, and in fact different subshells have different shapes. The first subshell is in the shape of a ball (Figure below (s)), which makes sense when visualized as an electron cloud surrounding the nucleus of an atom in three dimensions.
The second subshell resembles a dumbbell, consisting of two "petals" connected at one point near the center of the atom (figure below (p)).
The third subshell usually resembles a set of four "petals" clustered around the nucleus of an atom. These subshell shapes resemble graphical representations of antenna patterns with onion-like lobes extending from the antenna in various directions (Figure below (d)).
Orbitals: (s) triple symmetry;
(p) Shown: p x , one of three possible orientations (p x , p y , p z), along the respective axes;
(d) Shown: d x 2 -y 2 is similar to d xy , d yz , d xz . Shown: d z 2 . Number of possible d-orbitals: five.
Valid values for the orbital quantum number are positive integers, as for the principal quantum number, but also include zero. These quantum numbers for electrons are denoted by the letter l. The number of subshells is equal to the principal quantum number of the shell. Thus, the first shell (n = 1) has one subshell with number 0; the second shell (n = 2) has two subshells numbered 0 and 1; the third shell (n = 3) has three subshells numbered 0, 1 and 2.
The old subshell convention used letters rather than numbers. In this format, the first subshell (l = 0) was denoted s, the second subshell (l = 1) was denoted p, the third subshell (l = 2) was denoted d, and the fourth subshell (l = 3) was denoted f. The letters came from the words: sharp, principal, diffuse And Fundamental. You can still see these designations in many periodic tables used to denote the electron configuration of the outer ( valence) shells of atoms.
(a) the Bohr representation of the silver atom, (b) Orbital representation of Ag with division of shells into subshells (orbital quantum number l).
This diagram does not imply anything about the actual position of the electrons, but only represents the energy levels.
Magnetic quantum number: The magnetic quantum number for the electron classifies the orientation of the electron subshell figure. The "petals" of the subshells can be directed in several directions. These different orientations are called orbitals. For the first subshell (s; l = 0), which resembles a sphere, "direction" is not specified. For a second (p; l = 1) subshell in each shell that resembles a dumbbell pointing in three possible directions. Imagine three dumbbells intersecting at the origin, each pointing along its own axis in a triaxial coordinate system.
Valid values for a given quantum number consist of integers ranging from -l to l, and are denoted given number how m l in atomic physics and z in nuclear physics. To calculate the number of orbitals in any subshell, you need to double the number of the subshell and add 1, (2∙l + 1). For example, the first subshell (l = 0) in any shell contains one orbital numbered 0; the second subshell (l = 1) in any shell contains three orbitals with numbers -1, 0 and 1; the third subshell (l = 2) contains five orbitals numbered -2, -1, 0, 1 and 2; etc.
Like the principal quantum number, the magnetic quantum number arose directly from experimental data: the Zeeman effect, the separation of spectral lines by exposing an ionized gas to a magnetic field, hence the name "magnetic" quantum number.
Spin quantum number: like the magnetic quantum number, this property of the electrons of an atom was discovered through experiments. Careful observation of the spectral lines showed that each line was in fact a pair of very closely spaced lines, it has been suggested that this so-called fine structure was the result of each electron "spinning" around its own axis, like a planet. Electrons with different "spins" would give off slightly different frequencies of light when excited. The spinning electron concept is now obsolete, being more appropriate for the (incorrect) view of electrons as individual particles of matter rather than as "clouds", but the name remains.
Spin quantum numbers are denoted as m s in atomic physics and sz in nuclear physics. Each orbital in each subshell can have two electrons in each shell, one with spin +1/2 and the other with spin -1/2.
Physicist Wolfgang Pauli developed a principle that explains the ordering of electrons in an atom according to these quantum numbers. His principle, called Pauli exclusion principle, states that two electrons in the same atom cannot occupy the same quantum states. That is, each electron in an atom has a unique set of quantum numbers. This limits the number of electrons that can occupy any given orbital, subshell, and shell.
This shows the arrangement of electrons in a hydrogen atom:
With one proton in the nucleus, the atom accepts one electron for its electrostatic balance (the proton's positive charge is exactly balanced by negative charge electron). This electron is in the lower shell (n = 1), the first subshell (l = 0), in the only orbital (spatial orientation) of this subshell (m l = 0), with a spin value of 1/2. The general method of describing this structure is by enumerating the electrons according to their shells and subshells, according to a convention called spectroscopic notation. In this notation, the shell number is shown as an integer, the subshell as a letter (s,p,d,f), and the total number of electrons in the subshell (all orbitals, all spins) as a superscript. Thus, hydrogen, with its single electron placed at the base level, is described as 1s 1 .
Moving on to the next atom (in order of atomic number), we get the element helium:
A helium atom has two protons in its nucleus, which requires two electrons to balance the double positive electrical charge. Since two electrons - one with spin 1/2 and the other with spin -1/2 - are in the same orbital, the electronic structure of helium does not require additional subshells or shells to hold the second electron.
However, an atom requiring three or more electrons will need additional subshells to hold all the electrons, since only two electrons can be on the bottom shell (n = 1). Consider the next atom in the sequence of increasing atomic numbers, lithium:
The lithium atom uses part of the capacitance L of the shell (n = 2). This shell actually has a total capacity of eight electrons (maximum shell capacity = 2n 2 electrons). If we consider the structure of an atom with a completely filled L shell, we see how all combinations of subshells, orbitals, and spins are occupied by electrons:
Often, when assigning a spectroscopic notation to an atom, any fully filled shells are skipped, rather than filled shells and filled shells. top level are indicated. For example, the element neon (shown in the figure above), which has two completely filled shells, can be described spectrally simply as 2p 6 rather than as 1s 22 s 22 p 6 . Lithium, with its fully filled K shell and a single electron in the L shell, can simply be described as 2s 1 rather than 1s 22 s 1 .
The omission of fully populated lower-level shells is not only for convenience of notation. It also illustrates a basic principle of chemistry: the chemical behavior of an element is primarily determined by its unfilled shells. Both hydrogen and lithium have one electron on their outer shells (as 1 and 2s 1, respectively), that is, both elements have similar properties. Both are highly reactive, and react in almost identical ways (binding to similar elements under similar conditions). It doesn't really matter that lithium has a fully filled K-shell under an almost free L-shell: the unfilled L-shell is the one that determines its chemical behavior.
Elements that have completely filled outer shells are classified as noble and are characterized by an almost complete lack of reaction with other elements. These elements were classified as inert when they were considered not to react at all, but they are known to form compounds with other elements under certain conditions.
Since elements with the same electron configurations in their outer shells have similar Chemical properties, Dmitri Mendeleev organized the chemical elements in the table accordingly. This table known as , and modern tables follow this general layout, shown in the figure below.
Periodic table of chemical elements Dmitri Mendeleev, a Russian chemist, was the first to develop the periodic table of elements. Even though Mendeleev organized his table according to atomic mass, not atomic number, and created a table that was not as useful as modern periodic tables, his development stands as an excellent example of scientific proof. Seeing patterns of periodicity (similar chemical properties according to atomic mass), Mendeleev hypothesized that all elements must fit into this ordered pattern. When he discovered "empty" places in the table, he followed the logic of the existing order and assumed the existence of yet unknown elements. The subsequent discovery of these elements confirmed the scientific correctness of Mendeleev's hypothesis, further discoveries led to the form of the periodic table that we use now.
Like this should work science: hypotheses lead to logical conclusions and are accepted, changed or rejected depending on the consistency of experimental data with their conclusions. Any fool can formulate a hypothesis after the fact to explain the available experimental data, and many do. What distinguishes a scientific hypothesis from post hoc speculation is the prediction of future experimental data that has not yet been collected, and possibly the refutation of that data as a result. Boldly lead the hypothesis to its logical conclusion(s) and attempting to predict the results of future experiments is not a dogmatic leap of faith, but rather a public test of this hypothesis, open call opponents of the hypothesis. In other words, scientific hypotheses are always "risky" because of trying to predict the results of experiments that have not yet been done, and therefore can be falsified if the experiments do not go as expected. Thus, if a hypothesis correctly predicts the results of repeated experiments, it is disproven.
Quantum mechanics, first as a hypothesis and then as a theory, has been extremely successful in predicting the results of experiments, hence a high degree scientific trust. Many scientists have reason to believe that this is an incomplete theory, since its predictions are more true at microphysical scales than macroscopic ones, but nevertheless, it is an extremely useful theory for explaining and predicting the interaction of particles and atoms.
As you have already seen in this chapter, quantum physics is essential in describing and predicting the set various phenomena. In the next section, we will see its significance in the electrical conductivity of solids, including semiconductors. Simply put, nothing in chemistry or physics solid body does not make sense in the popular theoretical structure of electrons existing as separate particles of matter, circling around the nucleus of an atom, like miniature satellites. When electrons are viewed as "wave functions" existing in certain, discrete states that are regular and periodic, then the behavior of matter can be explained.
Summing up
The electrons in atoms exist in "clouds" of distributed probability, and not as discrete particles of matter revolving around the nucleus, like miniature satellites, as common examples show.
Individual electrons around the nucleus of an atom tend to unique "states" described by four quantum numbers: principal (radial) quantum number, known as shell; orbital (azimuth) quantum number, known as subshell; magnetic quantum number describing orbital(subshell orientation); And spin quantum number, or simply spin. These states are quantum, that is, “between them” there are no conditions for the existence of an electron, except for states that fit into the quantum numbering scheme.
Glanoe (radial) quantum number (n) describes the base level or shell in which the electron resides. The greater this number, the greater the radius of the electron cloud from the nucleus of the atom, and the greater the energy of the electron. Principal quantum numbers are integers (positive integers)
Orbital (azimuthal) quantum number (l) describes the shape of an electron cloud in a particular shell or level and is often known as a "subshell". In any shell, there are as many subshells (forms of an electron cloud) as the main quantum number of the shell. Azimuthal quantum numbers are positive integers starting from zero and ending with a number less than the main quantum number by one (n - 1).
Magnetic quantum number (m l) describes what orientation the subshell (electron cloud shape) has. Subshells can have as many different orientations as twice the subshell number (l) plus 1, (2l+1) (that is, for l=1, m l = -1, 0, 1), and each unique orientation is called an orbital. These numbers are integers starting from a negative value of the subshell number (l) through 0 and ending with a positive value of the subshell number.
Spin Quantum Number (m s) describes another property of the electron and can take the values +1/2 and -1/2.
Pauli exclusion principle says that two electrons in an atom cannot share the same set of quantum numbers. Therefore, there can be at most two electrons in each orbital (spin=1/2 and spin=-1/2), 2l+1 orbitals in each subshell, and n subshells in each shell, and no more.
Spectroscopic notation is a convention for the electronic structure of an atom. Shells are shown as integers, followed by subshell letters (s, p, d, f) with superscript numbers indicating the total number of electrons found in each respective subshell.
The chemical behavior of an atom is determined solely by electrons in unfilled shells. Low-level shells that are completely full have little or no effect on chemical characteristics linking elements.
Elements with completely filled electron shells are almost completely inert, and are called noble elements (previously known as inert).
No one in this world understands what quantum mechanics is. This is perhaps the most important thing to know about her. Of course, many physicists have learned to use the laws and even predict phenomena based on quantum computing. But it is still unclear why the observer of the experiment determines the behavior of the system and forces it to take one of two states.
Here are some examples of experiments with results that will inevitably change under the influence of the observer. They show that quantum mechanics practically deals with the intervention of conscious thought in material reality.
There are many interpretations of quantum mechanics today, but the Copenhagen interpretation is perhaps the best known. In the 1920s, its general postulates were formulated by Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg.
The basis of the Copenhagen interpretation was the wave function. This is a mathematical function containing information about all possible states of a quantum system in which it exists simultaneously. According to the Copenhagen Interpretation, the state of a system and its position relative to other states can only be determined by observation (the wave function is used only to mathematically calculate the probability of the system being in one state or another).
It can be said that after observation, a quantum system becomes classical and immediately ceases to exist in states other than the one in which it was observed. This conclusion found its opponents (remember the famous Einstein's "God does not play dice"), but the accuracy of calculations and predictions still had its own.
Nevertheless, the number of supporters of the Copenhagen interpretation is declining, and the main reason for this is the mysterious instantaneous collapse of the wave function during the experiment. Erwin Schrödinger's famous thought experiment with a poor cat should demonstrate the absurdity of this phenomenon. Let's remember the details.
Inside the black box sits a black cat and with it a vial of poison and a mechanism that can release the poison randomly. For example, a radioactive atom during decay can break a bubble. Exact time the decay of the atom is unknown. Only the half-life is known, during which decay occurs with a probability of 50%.
Obviously, for an external observer, the cat inside the box is in two states: it is either alive, if everything went well, or dead, if the decay has occurred and the vial has broken. Both of these states are described by the cat's wave function, which changes over time.
The more time has passed, the more likely it is that radioactive decay has occurred. But as soon as we open the box, the wave function collapses and we immediately see the results of this inhumane experiment.
In fact, until the observer opens the box, the cat will endlessly balance between life and death, or be both alive and dead. Its fate can only be determined as a result of the observer's actions. This absurdity was pointed out by Schrödinger.
According to a survey of famous physicists by The New York Times, the electron diffraction experiment is one of the most amazing studies in the history of science. What is its nature? There is a source that emits a beam of electrons onto a photosensitive screen. And there is an obstacle in the way of these electrons, a copper plate with two slots.
What picture can we expect on the screen if electrons are usually represented to us as small charged balls? Two stripes opposite the slots in the copper plate. But in fact, a much more complex pattern of alternating white and black stripes appears on the screen. This is due to the fact that when passing through the slit, electrons begin to behave not only as particles, but also as waves (photons or other light particles that can be a wave at the same time behave in the same way).
These waves interact in space, colliding and reinforcing each other, and as a result, a complex pattern of alternating light and dark stripes is displayed on the screen. At the same time, the result of this experiment does not change, even if the electrons pass one by one - even one particle can be a wave and pass through two slits at the same time. This postulate was one of the main ones in the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, when particles can simultaneously demonstrate their "ordinary" physical properties and exotic properties like a wave.
But what about the observer? It is he who makes this confusing story even more confusing. When physicists in experiments like this tried to use instruments to determine which slit an electron was actually going through, the picture on the screen changed dramatically and became “classical”: with two illuminated sections directly opposite the slits, without any alternating stripes.
The electrons seemed reluctant to reveal their wave nature to the watchful eye of onlookers. It looks like a mystery shrouded in darkness. But there is a simpler explanation: the observation of the system cannot be carried out without physical influence on it. We will discuss this later.
2. Heated fullerenes
Experiments on particle diffraction were carried out not only with electrons, but also with other, much larger objects. For example, fullerenes were used, large and closed molecules consisting of several tens of carbon atoms. Recently, a group of scientists from the University of Vienna, led by Professor Zeilinger, tried to include an element of observation in these experiments. To do this, they irradiated moving fullerene molecules with laser beams. Then, heated by an external source, the molecules began to glow and inevitably reflect their presence to the observer.
Along with this innovation, the behavior of molecules has also changed. Prior to such a comprehensive observation, fullerenes avoided an obstacle quite successfully (exhibiting wave properties), similar to the previous example with electrons hitting a screen. But with the presence of an observer, fullerenes began to behave like perfectly law-abiding physical particles.
3. Cooling measurement
One of the most famous laws in the world of quantum physics is the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, according to which it is impossible to determine the speed and position of a quantum object at the same time. The more accurately we measure the momentum of a particle, the less accurately we can measure its position. However, in our macroscopic real world the validity of quantum laws acting on tiny particles usually goes unnoticed.
Recent experiments by Prof. Schwab from the USA make a very valuable contribution to this field. Quantum effects in these experiments were demonstrated not at the level of electrons or fullerene molecules (which have an approximate diameter of 1 nm), but on larger objects, a tiny aluminum ribbon. This tape was fixed on both sides so that its middle was in a suspended state and could vibrate under external influence. In addition, a device capable of accurately recording the position of the tape was placed nearby. As a result of the experiment, several interesting things were discovered. Firstly, any measurement related to the position of the object and observation of the tape affected it, after each measurement the position of the tape changed.
The experimenters determined the coordinates of the tape with high accuracy, and thus, in accordance with the Heisenberg principle, changed its speed, and hence the subsequent position. Secondly, and quite unexpectedly, some measurements led to a cooling of the tape. Thus, an observer can change the physical characteristics of objects by their mere presence.
4. Freezing particles
As you know, unstable radioactive particles decay not only in experiments with cats, but also on their own. Each particle has an average lifetime, which, as it turns out, can increase under the watchful eye of an observer. This quantum effect was predicted back in the 60s, and its brilliant experimental proof appeared in a paper published by a group led by Nobel laureate in physics Wolfgang Ketterle of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
In this work, the decay of unstable excited rubidium atoms was studied. Immediately after the preparation of the system, the atoms were excited using a laser beam. The observation took place in two modes: continuous (the system was constantly exposed to small light pulses) and pulsed (the system was irradiated from time to time with more powerful pulses).
The results obtained were in full agreement with the theoretical predictions. External light effects slow down the decay of particles, returning them to their original state, which is far from the state of decay. The magnitude of this effect also coincided with the predictions. The maximum lifetime of unstable excited rubidium atoms increased by a factor of 30.
5. Quantum mechanics and consciousness
Electrons and fullerenes cease to show their wave properties, aluminum plates cool down, and unstable particles slow down their decay. The watchful eye of the beholder literally changes the world. Why can't this be evidence of the involvement of our minds in the work of the world? Perhaps Carl Jung and Wolfgang Pauli (Austrian physicist, Nobel laureate, pioneer of quantum mechanics) were right, after all, when they said that the laws of physics and consciousness should be considered as complementary to each other?
We are one step away from recognizing that the world around us is simply an illusory product of our mind. The idea is scary and tempting. Let's try to turn to physicists again. Especially in last years, when fewer and fewer people believe the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics with its mysterious wave function collapses, turning to a more mundane and reliable decoherence.
The fact is that in all these experiments with observations, the experimenters inevitably influenced the system. They lit it with a laser and installed measuring instruments. They were united by an important principle: you cannot observe a system or measure its properties without interacting with it. Any interaction is a process of modifying properties. Especially when a tiny quantum system is exposed to colossal quantum objects. Some eternally neutral Buddhist observer is impossible in principle. And here the term "decoherence" comes into play, which is irreversible from the point of view of thermodynamics: the quantum properties of a system change when interacting with another large system.
During this interaction, the quantum system loses its original properties and becomes classical, as if “obeying” major system. This also explains the paradox of Schrödinger's cat: a cat is too much big system, so it cannot be isolated from the rest of the world. The very design of this thought experiment is not entirely correct.
In any case, if we assume the reality of the act of creation by consciousness, decoherence seems to be a much more convenient approach. Perhaps even too convenient. With this approach, the entire classical world becomes one big consequence of decoherence. And as the author of one of the most famous books in the field stated, such an approach logically leads to statements like "there are no particles in the world" or "there is no time at a fundamental level."
What is the truth: in the creator-observer or powerful decoherence? We need to choose between two evils. Nevertheless, scientists are increasingly convinced that quantum effects are a manifestation of our mental processes. And where observation ends and reality begins depends on each of us.
According to topinfopost.com
Kvantinė fizika statusas T sritis fizika atitikmenys: engl. quantum physics vok. Quantenphysik, f rus. quantum physics, f pranc. physique quantique, f … Fizikos terminų žodynas
This term has other meanings, see Stationary state. steady state(from Latin stationarius standing still, motionless) is the state of a quantum system in which its energy and other dynamic ... Wikipedia
- ... Wikipedia
Has the following subsections (the list is not complete): Quantum mechanics Algebraic quantum theory Quantum theory fields Quantum electrodynamics Quantum chromodynamics Quantum thermodynamics Quantum gravity Superstring theory See also ... ... Wikipedia
Quantum mechanics Uncertainty principle Introduction ... Mathematical formulation ... Basis ... Wikipedia
PHYSICS. 1. The subject and structure of physics F. the science that studies the simplest and at the same time the most. general properties and laws of motion of the objects of the material world surrounding us. As a result of this generality, there are no natural phenomena that do not have physical. properties... Physical Encyclopedia
Hypernuclear physics is a branch of physics at the intersection of nuclear physics and elementary particle physics, in which the subject of research is nucleus-like systems containing, in addition to protons and neutrons, other elementary particles hyperons. Also ... ... Wikipedia
A branch of physics that studies the dynamics of particles in accelerators, as well as numerous technical problems associated with the construction and operation of particle accelerators. The physics of accelerators includes issues related to the production and accumulation of particles ... Wikipedia
Physics of crystals Crystal crystallography Crystal lattice Types of crystal lattices Diffraction in crystals Reciprocal lattice Wigner Seitz cell Brillouin zone Structural basis factor Atomic scattering factor Types of bonds in ... ... Wikipedia
Quantum logic is a branch of logic necessary for reasoning about sentences that take into account the principles of quantum theory. This area of research was founded in 1936 by the work of Garit Bierhof and John von Neumann, who tried ... ... Wikipedia
Books
- Quantum Physics, Leonid Karlovich Martinson. The theoretical and experimental material underlying quantum physics is presented in detail. Much attention is paid to the physical content of the basic quantum concepts and mathematical ...
- Quantum Physics, Sheddad Qaid-Sala Ferron. Our whole world and everything that is in it - houses, trees and even people! - is made up of tiny particles. The book "Quantum Physics" from the series "First books about science" will tell about the invisible to our ...
Quantum physics has radically changed our understanding of the world. According to quantum physics, we can influence the process of rejuvenation with our consciousness!
Why is this possible?From the point of view of quantum physics, our reality is a source of pure potentialities, a source of raw materials that make up our body, our mind and the entire Universe. The universal energy and information field never stops changing and transforming, turning into something new every second.
In the 20th century, during physical experiments with subatomic particles and photons, it was discovered that the fact of observing the course of an experiment changes its results. What we focus our attention on can react.
This fact is confirmed by a classic experiment that surprises scientists every time. It was repeated in many laboratories and the same results were always obtained.
For this experiment, a light source and a screen with two slits were prepared. As a light source, a device was used that "shot" photons in the form of single pulses.
The course of the experiment was monitored. After the end of the experiment, two vertical stripes were visible on the photographic paper that was behind the slits. These are traces of photons that passed through the slits and illuminated the photographic paper.
When this experiment was repeated in automatic mode, without human intervention, the picture on photographic paper changed:
If the researcher turned on the device and left, and after 20 minutes the photographic paper developed, then not two, but many vertical stripes were found on it. These were traces of radiation. But the drawing was different.
The structure of the trace on photographic paper resembled the trace of a wave that passed through the slits. Light can exhibit the properties of a wave or a particle.
As a result of the simple fact of observation, the wave disappears and turns into particles. If you do not observe, then a trace of the wave appears on the photographic paper. This physical phenomenon is called the Observer Effect.
The same results were obtained with other particles. The experiments were repeated many times, but each time they surprised scientists. So it was discovered that at the quantum level, matter reacts to the attention of a person. This was new in physics.
According to the concepts of modern physics, everything materializes from the void. This emptiness is called "quantum field", "zero field" or "matrix". The void contains energy that can turn into matter.
Matter consists of concentrated energy - this is the fundamental discovery of physics of the 20th century.
There are no solid parts in an atom. Objects are made up of atoms. But why are objects solid? A finger attached to a brick wall does not pass through it. Why? This is due to differences in the frequency characteristics of atoms and electric charges. Each type of atom has its own vibration frequency. This defines the differences physical properties items. If it were possible to change the vibration frequency of the atoms that make up the body, then a person could pass through the walls. But the vibrational frequencies of the atoms of the hand and the atoms of the wall are close. Therefore, the finger rests on the wall.
For any kind of interaction, frequency resonance is necessary.
This is easy to understand with a simple example. If you illuminate a stone wall with the light of a flashlight, the light will be blocked by the wall. However, mobile phone radiation will easily pass through this wall. It's all about the frequency differences between the radiation of a flashlight and a mobile phone. While you are reading this text, streams of very different radiation are passing through your body. These are cosmic radiation, radio signals, signals from millions of mobile phones, radiation coming from the earth, solar radiation, radiation created by household appliances, etc.
You don't feel it because you can only see light and hear only sound. Even if you sit in silence with your eyes closed, millions of telephone conversations, pictures of television news and radio messages go through your head. You do not perceive this, because there is no resonance of frequencies between the atoms that make up your body and radiation. But if there is a resonance, then you immediately react. For example, when you remember a loved one who just thought of you. Everything in the universe obeys the laws of resonance.
The world consists of energy and information. Einstein, after much thought about the structure of the world, said: "The only reality that exists in the universe is the field." Just as waves are a creation of the sea, all manifestations of matter: organisms, planets, stars, galaxies are creations of the field.
The question arises, how is matter created from the field? What force controls the motion of matter?
Research scientists led them to an unexpected answer. The founder of quantum physics, Max Planck, said the following during his Nobel Prize speech:
“Everything in the Universe is created and exists due to force. We must assume that behind this force is a conscious mind, which is the matrix of all matter.
MATTER IS GOVERNED BY CONSCIOUSNESS
At the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, new ideas appeared in theoretical physics that make it possible to explain the strange properties of elementary particles. Particles can appear from the void and suddenly disappear. Scientists admit the possibility of the existence of parallel universes. Perhaps particles move from one layer of the universe to another. Celebrities such as Stephen Hawking, Edward Witten, Juan Maldacena, Leonard Susskind are involved in the development of these ideas.
According to the concepts of theoretical physics, the Universe resembles a nesting doll, which consists of many nesting dolls - layers. These are the variants of the universes - Parallel Worlds. The ones next to each other are very similar. But the further the layers are from each other, the less similarities between them. Theoretically, in order to move from one universe to another, spaceships are not required. All possible options are located one inside the other. For the first time these ideas were expressed by scientists in the middle of the 20th century. At the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, they received mathematical confirmation. Today, such information is easily accepted by the public. However, a couple of hundred years ago, for such statements they could be burned at the stake or declared crazy.
Everything arises from emptiness. Everything is in motion. Items are an illusion. Matter is made up of energy. Everything is created by thought. These discoveries of quantum physics contain nothing new. All this was known to the ancient sages. In many mystical teachings, which were considered secret and were available only to initiates, it was said that there was no difference between thoughts and objects.Everything in the world is full of energy. The universe responds to thought. Energy follows attention.
What you focus your attention on begins to change. These thoughts in various formulations are given in the Bible, ancient Gnostic texts, in mystical teachings that arose in India and South America. The builders of the ancient pyramids guessed this. This knowledge is the key to the new technologies that are being used today to manipulate reality.
Our body is a field of energy, information and mind, which is in a state of constant dynamic exchange with environment. The impulses of the mind constantly, every second, give the body new forms to adapt to the changing demands of life.
From the point of view of quantum physics, our physical body under the influence of our mind is able to make a quantum leap from one biological age to another, without passing through all intermediate ages. published
P.S. And remember, just by changing your consumption, we are changing the world together! © econet
- In contact with 0
- Google+ 0
- OK 0
- Facebook 0
