meta user
network profile
| bio | website | ziga-lausegger.netau.net/… |
|---|---|---|
| location | Slovenia | |
| age | 27 | |
| visits | member for | 1 year, 5 months |
| seen | 18 hours ago | |
| stats | profile views | 180 |
I love to program and crosscompile baremetal C programs for ARM based microcontrollers, I love physics and i love writing science documents/books in LaTeX. It amazes me how physics is connecting all science and is helping mathematics to evolve. In order for science profession to comunicate on a high level i advise everyone to use Linux, LaTeX and a good vector imaging program like Inkscape.
|
Jan 24 |
revised |
Proof for $p=\gamma_Pmu$ edited body |
|
Jan 24 |
comment |
Proof for $p=\gamma_Pmu$ I recommend avoiding relativistic mass as long as possible. |
|
Jan 24 |
answered | Proof for $p=\gamma_Pmu$ |
|
Jan 24 |
comment |
Probability and probability amplitude So when person starts to learn QM he should actually start over like Newton did. Newton (1) saw apple falling from a tree (2) draw some graphs (3) guessed 2. Newton's law In QM scientists (1) saw electron behaving like a wave and so they (2) draw a probability graph which shows interference pattern and in the end from graph (3) we concluded or guessed that: $P \propto |A|^2$ Like Newton we also have all the rights to do this right? |
|
Jan 23 |
comment |
Probability and probability amplitude This postulate seems like a "dogma" to me. |
|
Jan 23 |
comment |
Probability and probability amplitude @dmckee I am learning QM and the problem is that it is hard for me to just believe in this equation. It has no background and is completely made up not derived. Some even write it down like $P \propto |A|^2$ insead of $P = |A|^2$. I mean compared to Einsteins relativity where everything was derived this is ugly to me (personal opinion). Are there at least any similar cases where we take a square of something to get probability? If we re going to guess theories like this they are sooner or later going to fail (my oppinion). |
|
Jan 23 |
asked | Probability and probability amplitude |
|
Jan 20 |
comment |
Gravitational redshift derivation Thank you. It helped a lot. I haven't yet learned GR, so i think this will be my next book on Amazon. It is sad our professor used above derivation (which is wrong but accidentaly gives the right anwser) but never warned us about this. I really don't know why did i deserve negative points... |
|
Jan 18 |
asked | Gravitational redshift derivation |
|
Jan 18 |
accepted | Kinetic energy of a photon and Schwarzschild radius |
|
Jan 18 |
comment |
Kinetic energy of a photon and Schwarzschild radius Our professor derived it like this. Furthermore he didnt even warn us the derivation is WRONG! But i am amazed! What a coincidence indeed :) |
|
Jan 18 |
asked | Kinetic energy of a photon and Schwarzschild radius |
|
Jan 17 |
comment |
Photons in a gravitational field Relativistic mass should always be written $m_{rel}$ otherwise there is too much confusion going on. |
|
Jan 17 |
accepted | Why is energy-momentum 4-vector so much easier to explore/observe than spacetime 4-vector |
|
Jan 16 |
comment |
Photons in a gravitational field $E$ in the term $E = mc^2$ is a "rest energy" $E_0$ which is an energy which only particles with mass have. Good example is pair production. Photon has no mass and therefore has no rest energy right which is correct i think. |
|
Jan 16 |
comment |
Photons in a gravitational field Arthur Beiser - Concepts of modern physics |
|
Jan 16 |
comment |
Photons in a gravitational field When you say: "but they definitely have a mass from $E=mc^2$" you should know that $m$ is the rest mass here and as you stated yourself the rest mass is zero so $m=0$. |
|
Jan 16 |
comment |
Photons in a gravitational field This would be awesome. |
|
Jan 16 |
comment |
Photons in a gravitational field On this page i read that even Einstein warned against the concept of mass increasing with velocity. Unfortunately this warning was ignored. physicsandphysicists.blogspot.com/2009/04/… |
|
Jan 16 |
comment |
Photons in a gravitational field A derivation of gravitational redshift in which i canno't prove that mass of a photon is 0. |
