New answers tagged

4

"A bunch of cool complex analysis stuff popped up and solved my problem" is about as honest as it gets. But physicists do this from more or less their first differential equation: using $e^{i \omega t}$ to track both solutions via the cool-ness of complex analysis. There's no a priori or manifestly physics-based reason to do it that way. In the "original" ...


0

Your confusion is elementary. It is specified that the wavepackets have a well-defined momentum, and that at $t=0$ they are located at the origin. Now since the wave packets have a well-defined momentum, they move at a constant velocity. An object which is at the origin at $t=0$ and moves at a constant velocity will be very far from the origin as $t \to \...


1

Yes or no, it depends what you precisely understand by this short sentence. The word "inelastic" doesn't really mean that we don't "want" to detect something. Physics doesn't say what we should "want". "Deep" means that the quarks (and perhaps the electron) penetrate very close to each other and the scattering studies the behavior of the matter at ...


1

I will address: My question - Does not photon, which is supposed to be quantum of electro-magnetic field, interact with an electron "electromagnetically"? A photon and an electron are elementary particles, quantum mecanical entities. Probabilities of interaction in quantum mechanics are calculated from the wave functions of the system in QED, using ...



Top 50 recent answers are included