Monday, 16 February 2026 »  Login
in

Of quantum mechanics and theory of relativity

Quizzing? Movies? Music? Tech? Cricket? God? Whatever your interests be, there are hundreds of your alter-egos on fullhyd.com - it's a whole city out there!

Moderator: The Moderator Team

Who is the coolest?

Einstein
8
89%
Newton
1
11%
Heisenberg
0
No votes
Schroedinger
0
No votes
Raman
0
No votes
Kepler
0
No votes
Curie
0
No votes
Mendeleef
0
No votes
Rutherford
0
No votes
 
Total votes : 9

by Lucifer » Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:26 am

This is dedicated to CAD.



Raman Effect wrote:Raman scattering or the Raman effect is the inelastic scattering of a photon which creates or annihilates an optical phonon.

When light is scattered from an atom or molecule, most photons are elastically scattered (Rayleigh scattering). The scattered photons have the same energy (frequency) and, therefore, wavelength, as the incident photons. However, a small fraction of light (approximately 1 in 107 photons) is scattered at optical frequencies different from, and usually lower than, the frequency of the incident photons. In a gas, Raman scattering can occur with a change in vibrational, rotational or electronic energy of a molecule (see energy level). Chemists are concerned primarily with the vibrational Raman effect.

In 1922, Indian physicist Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman published his work on the "Molecular Diffraction of Light," the first of a series of investigations with his collaborators which ultimately led to his discovery of the radiation effect, on the 28th of February 1928 which bears his name. The Raman effect was first reported by C.V. Raman and K.S. Krishnan, and independently by Grigory Landsberg and Leonid Mandelstam in 1928. Raman received the Nobel Prize in 1930 for his work on the scattering of light.

Raman Scattering: Stokes and anti-Stokes

The interaction of light with matter in a linear regime allows the absorption or simultaneous emission of light of energy precisely matching the difference in energy levels of the interacting electrons. The Raman effect is a nonlinear (second order) effect.

The Raman effect correponds, in perturbation theory, to the absorption and subsequent emission of a photon via an intermediate electron state, having a virtual energy level (see also: Feynman diagram). There are three possibilities :

* no energy exchange between the incident photons and the molecules (and hence no Raman effect)
* energy exchanges occur between the incident photons and the molecules. The energy differences are equal to the differences of the vibrational and rotational energy-levels of the molecule. In crystals only specific phonons are allowed (solutions of the wave equations which do not cancel themselves) by the periodic structure, so Raman scattering can only appear at certain frequencies. For amorphous materials like glasses, more phonons are allowed and thereby the discrete spectral lines become broad.

* molecule absorbs energy: Stokes scattering. The resuting photon of lower energy generates a Stokes line on the red side of the incident spectrum.
* molecule loses energy: anti-Stokes scattering. Incident photons are shifted to the blue side of the spectrum, thus generating an anti-Stokes line.
Image
These differences in energy are measured by subtracting the energy of the mono-energetic laser light from the energy of the scattered photons. The absolute value, however, doesn't depend on the process (Stokes or anti-Stokes scattering), because only the energy of the different vibrational levels is of importance. Therefore, the Raman spectrum is symmetric relative to the Rayleigh band. In addition, the intensities of the Raman bands are only dependant on the number of molecules occupying the different vibrational states, when the process began. The Boltzmann distribution teaches us that more molecules occupy the lower energy levels in most cases:
Image
with:

N0: amount of atoms in the lower vibrational state
N1: amount of atoms in the higher vibrational state
g0: degeneration in the lower vibrational state (amount of orbitals of the same energy)
g1: degeneration in the higher vibrational state (amount of orbitals of the same energy)
ΔEv: energy difference between these two vibrational states
k: boltzmans constant
T: temperature in Kelvin

Thus the Stokes spectrum is more intense than the anti-Stokes spectrum.

Distinction with fluorescence

The Raman effect is to be distinguished from the process of fluorescence. For the latter, the incident light is completely absorbed and the system is transferred to an excited state from which it can go to various lower states only after a certain resonance lifetime. The result of both processes is essentially the same: A light quantum of a frequency different from that of the incident quantum is produced and the molecule is brought to a higher or lower energy level. But the major difference is that the Raman effect can take place for any frequency of the incident light. In contradistinction with the fluorescence effect, the Raman effect is therefore not a resonant effect.

Selection rules

The distortion of a molecule in an electric field, and therefore the vibrational Raman cross section, is determined by its polarisability.

A Raman transition from one state to another, and therefore a Raman shift, can occur only when the polarisibility changes during the process under consideration (that is, during the vibration or rotation). The key quantity is the derivative of the polarisabilty with respect to the normal mode excited during the transition.

Stimulated Raman Scattering and Raman amplification

Raman amplification can be obtained by using Stimulated Raman Scattering (SRS), which actually is a combination between a Raman process with stimulated emission. It is interesting for application in telecomunication fibers to amplify inside the standard material with low noise for the amplification process. However the process need high powers and thus imposes more stringent limits onto the material. The amplification band can be up to 100nm broad, depending on the availability of allowed photon states.

Raman spectrum generation

For high intensity cw (contiuous wave) lasers SRS can be used to produce broad bandwidth spectra. This process can also be seen as a special case of four wave mixing, where the frequencies of the two incident photons are equal and the emitted spectra are found in two bands separated from the incident light by the phonon energies. The initial Raman spectrum is build up with spontaneous emission and is amplified later on. At high pumping levels in long fibers higher order Raman spectra can be generated by using the Raman spectrum as a new starting point, thereby building a chain of new spectra with decreasing amplitude. The disadvantage of intrinsic noise due to the initial spontaneous process can be overcome by seeding a spectrum at the beginning, or even using a feedback loop like in a resonator to stabilize the process. Since this technology easily fits into the fast evolving fiber optic laser field and there is demand for transversal coherent high intensity light sources (i.e. broadband telecommunication, imaging applications), Raman amplification and spectrum generation might be widely used in the near future.

Applications

The Raman Effect is used in materials analysis. The frequency of light scattered from a molecule may be changed based on the structural characteristics of the molecular bonds. A monochromatic light source (laser) is required for illumination, and a spectrogram of the scattered light then shows the deviations caused by state changes in the molecule. Not sure?


Source: Wikipedia
Nothing travels faster than light with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws.
-- Douglas Adams
http://artfilm.fullhydblogs.com/
User avatar
Lucifer
Level 3 Star User
Level 3 Star User
 
Posts: 1525
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Hades

by CtrlAltDel » Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:49 am

Lucifer wrote:This is dedicated to CAD.
thanQ! :D



...aur isske aage kuch samajh mein nai aaya...
wtf? i no longer care if my posts hurt yr feelings :roll:
Love me or hate me, u cant ignore me :D
User avatar
CtrlAltDel
God!
God!
 
Posts: 14824
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 5:02 pm
Location: by the Workshop

by san » Wed Aug 31, 2005 2:24 pm

Science and the seance

By Hannah Goff

BBC News





The Fox sisters, founders of Spiritualism, used code of knocks

The world's most eminent scientists are not usually associated with the dim-lit surroundings of a clairvoyant's parlour.

But some of science's biggest names have not only dabbled in, but been entirely convinced by the world of the seance.





Guglielmo Marconi, Alexander Graham Bell and John Logie Baird are familiar to most for the household indispensables they invented. But the attraction to spiritualism they all shared is definitely not part of the GCSE science syllabus.



All three men, and many other Victorian scientific pioneers, became involved with the religion, which depended on strange forces being demonstrated through bizarre phenomena.



Legitimacy



But how did the world of certainty and precision collide and, in some cases, fuse with that of levitating spiritualists and voices from the "other side"?



To some, it was simply down to chronology. When the Fox sisters of Hydesville, New York State - widely considered to be the founders of modern spiritualism - first claimed to have communicated with the dead, the world was awash with scientific endeavour.





Just four years earlier a communication of a very different sort - the first electric telegraph - was sent across the Atlantic.





The Spiritualist craze spread in Victorian society



Science was challenging the old certainties about life - making the impossible, possible.





According to the biographer of the Fox sisters, Barbara Weisberg: "There was so much that was exciting and so much that wouldn't have been thought possible two decades before.



"If people could communicate over the telegraph, why couldn't this world and the next world communicate?"



This gave the sisters' claims greater legitimacy, she says.



As the spiritualist craze grew people from every level of Victorian society crammed into dingy parlours, where knocks and raps indicated the presence of spirits.



Defying gravity



Messages from the dead were spelt out using lettered cards while strange voices were mumbled in the dark.



But it was in the search for proof these phenomena were real and not cons, that the world of the spiritualist and the scientist came together.



Science historian at Cambridge University, Dr Richard Noakes, says scientists leapt to the task.



I am convinced that discoveries of far-reaching importance remain waiting along these shadowy and discredited paths



John Logie Baird on spiritualism



"If there was any truth in phenomena that appear to defy the known laws of nature, the known laws of gravity, then scientists believed that they had to be the ones to investigate."





When the bizarre phenomenon of table-turning hit the parlours of Victorian England, the leading experimental scientist of the day, Michael Faraday, was called in.



After attending two seances, the deeply Christian Faraday devised an experiment to see if there was a rational explanation. He decided there was and dismissed supernatural causes as nonsense.





Hypnotist



Some 15 years later, the feats of medium Daniel Dunglass Home reached new heights as he was seen to levitate out of one window and back through another. Many believed he was simply a hypnotist.



This time the eminent chemist, William Crookes, who unlike Faraday was keen to discover a psychic force, subjected Home's activities to his own test.





Daniel Dunglass Home was accused by some of being a hypnotist



He devised a machine he called a radiometer to measure the "invisible forces" the medium appeared to be tapping into.



Another gave a reading when the maestro appeared to move a lever without touching it.



"Here's an instrument Daniel Dunglass Home can't possibly mesmerise because it's not a living being. How can you hypnotise an instrument?" says Dr Noakes.



"So Crookes reckons he got the traces of a psychic force in operation."



Crookes went on to invent the cathode-ray tube, pioneer research into radiation effects, photography, wireless telegraphy, electricity and spectroscopy.



Logie Baird, who built on Crookes' work to create television, was also persuaded by his seance experiences.



'Shadowy'



Not only did he claim to have communicated with the spirit of US scientist Thomas Edison, but after visiting a seance in 1926 he wrote: "I am convinced that discoveries of far reaching importance remain waiting along these shadowy and discredited paths."



But Logie Baird was trying to do exactly what mediums of the day were doing - transmitting sounds and images through space. Only the source of these, if you believe the medium, were different.



At the end of the 19th Century when Guglielmo Marconi was experimenting with the first radio signals, he was shocked when he started to receive signals.





The Fox sisters are still revered today

The author of Spirit Communication, Roy Stemman, says Marconi concluded these were from the spirit world.



"He spent his last years trying to perfect an electronic device that would establish a permanent contact between this world and the next."



This was never achieved, but his work pioneered the telecommunications that still link the globe today.



Dr Noakes says that whether or not the scientists declared the whole thing to be bogus, the example they set was "extremely powerful to the next generation of scientists".



Despite years of research, no scientist has proved seances were anything more than an elaborate con trick.



But the work they did trying often contributed to a greater understanding of the laws of physics.



Science and the Seance will be broadcast on BBC Two on Wednesday 31 August at 2100 BST
User avatar
san
Level 1 Star User
Level 1 Star User
 
Posts: 700
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:34 pm

Thank You, "san" Gaaru!

by HH » Wed Aug 31, 2005 6:15 pm

san wrote:Science***** ...




Thank You, "san" Gaaru!



***** Science ... Next Stage Is Spiritualism ... To Be Learnt Through The "Master Of The Time", Who Has To Be Sought And Realised By Those Interested In The "Super Science" Of Spiritualism ...



Image
Build Heaven & Earth Links!
User avatar
HH
Level 1 Deity
Level 1 Deity
 
Posts: 6245
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 8:40 am

by Lucifer » Sun Nov 20, 2005 7:28 pm

Thought I should re-surrect this thread :D.



Schrödinger's Cat wrote:Schrödinger's cat is a seemingly paradoxical thought experiment devised by Erwin Schrödinger that attempts to illustrate the incompleteness of the theory of quantum mechanics when going from subatomic to macroscopic systems. The experiment proposes:

A cat is placed in a sealed box. Attached to the box is an apparatus containing a radioactive nucleus and a canister of poison gas. The experiment is set up so that there is a 50% chance of the nucleus decaying in one hour. If the nucleus decays, it will emit a particle that triggers the apparatus, which opens the canister and kills the cat. According to quantum mechanics, the unobserved nucleus is described as a superposition (mixture) of "decayed nucleus" and "undecayed nucleus". However, when the box is opened the experimenter sees only a "decayed nucleus/dead cat" or an "undecayed nucleus/living cat."

The question is: when does the system stop existing as a mixture of states and become one or the other? The purpose of the experiment is to illustrate that quantum mechanics is incomplete without some rules to describe when the wavefunction collapses and the cat becomes dead or remains alive instead of a mixture of both.

Contrary to popular belief, Schrödinger did not intend this thought experiment to indicate that he believed that the dead-alive cat would actually exist; rather he considered the quantum mechanical theory to be incomplete and not representative of reality in this case. Since a cat clearly must either be alive or dead (there is no state between alive and dead, e.g. half-dead) surely the same must be true of the nucleus. It must be either decayed or not decayed.


Source: [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrödinger's_cat]Wikipedia[/url]
Nothing travels faster than light with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws.
-- Douglas Adams
http://artfilm.fullhydblogs.com/
User avatar
Lucifer
Level 3 Star User
Level 3 Star User
 
Posts: 1525
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Hades

by talky » Sun Nov 20, 2005 9:42 pm

now in physics i have a law of energy conversion....



energy at any level is MGH joules
Use ur brains in ths DB's else u will bcome like mee
User avatar
talky
Level 3 Star User
Level 3 Star User
 
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 3:12 pm

by Lucifer » Sun Nov 20, 2005 10:05 pm

talky wrote:now in physics i have a law of energy conversion....

energy at any level is MGH joules


where: M is in kg

G is in m/s/s

H is in m



Talky, units are as important as the formula. Don't forget that.
Nothing travels faster than light with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws.
-- Douglas Adams
http://artfilm.fullhydblogs.com/
User avatar
Lucifer
Level 3 Star User
Level 3 Star User
 
Posts: 1525
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Hades

by spamtaneous » Sun Nov 20, 2005 10:33 pm

Lucifer wrote:
talky wrote:now in physics i have a law of energy conversion....

energy at any level is MGH joules

where: M is in kg
G is in m/s/s
H is in m

Talky, units are as important as the formula. Don't forget that.




isnt joule a unit :roll:
User avatar
spamtaneous
Level 1 Lord
Level 1 Lord
 
Posts: 2431
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:42 pm

by CtrlAltDel » Mon Nov 21, 2005 7:39 am

Lucifer wrote:
Schrödinger's Cat wrote:.....
....
....
:?



maybe i am not made for physics...:roll:
wtf? i no longer care if my posts hurt yr feelings :roll:
Love me or hate me, u cant ignore me :D
User avatar
CtrlAltDel
God!
God!
 
Posts: 14824
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 5:02 pm
Location: by the Workshop

by KK » Mon Nov 21, 2005 12:25 pm

Lucifer wrote:
talky wrote:now in physics i have a law of energy conversion....

energy at any level is MGH joules

where: M is in kg
G is in m/s/s
H is in m

Talky, units are as important as the formula. Don't forget that.




should it not be grams instead of kilo grams?

btw talky, herez a brain teaser ... wuz the energy of the same object which is at a height H & posses a velocity V.
User avatar
KK
Registered User
 
Posts: 355
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 2:51 am

by Lucifer » Mon Nov 21, 2005 6:02 pm

KK wrote:
Lucifer wrote:
talky wrote:now in physics i have a law of energy conversion....

energy at any level is MGH joules

where: M is in kg
G is in m/s/s
H is in m

Talky, units are as important as the formula. Don't forget that.


should it not be grams instead of kilo grams?
btw talky, herez a brain teaser ... wuz the energy of the same object which is at a height H & posses a velocity V.




No. Mass is the only dimension where kilo is used in the units. In fact, unlike other units where kilo is not the base unit, for mass kilogram is the base unit.



And, spamtaneous. Joule is a unit. But the energy that the equation calculates would be in joules only if m, g, h are in SI units. In this case, the LHS and the RHS were not balanced.
Nothing travels faster than light with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws.
-- Douglas Adams
http://artfilm.fullhydblogs.com/
User avatar
Lucifer
Level 3 Star User
Level 3 Star User
 
Posts: 1525
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Hades

by kk » Tue Nov 22, 2005 7:45 am

Lucifer wrote:No. Mass is the only dimension where kilo is used in the units. In fact, unlike other units where kilo is not the base unit, for mass kilogram is the base unit.


good point!
User avatar
kk
Registered User
 
Posts: 355
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 2:51 am

by betty » Tue Nov 22, 2005 5:01 pm

talky wrote:now in physics i have a law of energy conversion....

energy at any level is MGH joules




That is only if the body is not moving, otherwise we also have a kinetic energy = 1/2 MV*V



where

M = mass

V = velocity.



Correct me if I am wrong, it was a long time back, so have become rusty on that subject :|
User avatar
betty
Level 1 Star User
Level 1 Star User
 
Posts: 580
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 1:41 pm

by Lucifer » Wed Nov 23, 2005 11:34 am

betty wrote:
talky wrote:now in physics i have a law of energy conversion....

energy at any level is MGH joules


That is only if the body is not moving, otherwise we also have a kinetic energy = 1/2 MV*V

where
M = mass
V = velocity.

Correct me if I am wrong, it was a long time back, so have become rusty on that subject :|




Oh no, Beettyji! You are right on! Don't see any rust on you. :D



In the meantime, here is a teaser question. Is velocity of light a scalar or a vector quantity?



Ice cream at Baskin Robbins to whoever first gets it right. :D
Nothing travels faster than light with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws.
-- Douglas Adams
http://artfilm.fullhydblogs.com/
User avatar
Lucifer
Level 3 Star User
Level 3 Star User
 
Posts: 1525
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Hades

by betty » Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:04 pm

Lucifer wrote:

In the meantime, here is a teaser question. Is velocity of light a scalar or a vector quantity?

Ice cream at Baskin Robbins to whoever first gets it right. :D




If it is 'velocity', it has to be a vector quantity.



However, when we say E=MC*C,

this C, though is called 'velocity' loosely, is actually the 'speed' of light.



So there, seems like I gave you a multiple-choice answer to a teaser question. :P
User avatar
betty
Level 1 Star User
Level 1 Star User
 
Posts: 580
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 1:41 pm

by betty » Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:04 pm

Lucifer wrote:

In the meantime, here is a teaser question. Is velocity of light a scalar or a vector quantity?

Ice cream at Baskin Robbins to whoever first gets it right. :D




If it is 'velocity', it has to be a vector quantity.



However, when we say E=MC*C,

this C, though is called 'velocity' loosely, is actually the 'speed' of light, so is actually a scalar quantity.



So there, seems like I gave you a multiple-choice answer to a teaser question. :P
User avatar
betty
Level 1 Star User
Level 1 Star User
 
Posts: 580
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 1:41 pm

by Lucifer » Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:21 pm

Bettyji, speed is scalar. There is no doubt about that whatsoever. In e=mc2, it is speed of light. Hence, the quantity is scalar. But if we specifically state velocity of light then is it a scalar or a vector quantity?
Nothing travels faster than light with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws.
-- Douglas Adams
http://artfilm.fullhydblogs.com/
User avatar
Lucifer
Level 3 Star User
Level 3 Star User
 
Posts: 1525
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Hades

by spamtaneous » Wed Nov 23, 2005 10:04 pm

Lucifer wrote:Bettyji, speed is scalar. There is no doubt about that whatsoever. In e=mc2, it is speed of light. Hence, the quantity is scalar. But if we specifically state velocity of light then is it a scalar or a vector quantity?




:? velocity of light is a vector quantity.... thats what betty said.... dont tell me its wrong :?
User avatar
spamtaneous
Level 1 Lord
Level 1 Lord
 
Posts: 2431
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:42 pm

by Lucifer » Wed Nov 23, 2005 10:22 pm

Okay, here goes. It is surprising to most people, but velocity of light is a scalar quantity. Read on:



Parallelogram Law of Vector Addition wrote:If two vectors P and Q can be represented in magnitude and direction by two adjacent sides of a parallelogram drawn outwards from a point, then their vector sum R is the diagonal of the same parallelogram drawn outwards from the same point.

The magnitude and direction of the vector sum R are given respectively by:

Image


Now, a quantity is vector if and only if it:

1. has magnitude

2. has direction

3. obeys the parallelogram law of vector addition



In the case of the velocity of light, condition no. 3 is not adhered to. For example, if we have two light beams in vacuum adding them up does not give us a resultant light beam that has a speed more than that of the incident light beams in vacuum because there is nothing that travels faster than the speed of light in vacuum.



Sad, no one gets the ice cream.
Nothing travels faster than light with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws.
-- Douglas Adams
http://artfilm.fullhydblogs.com/
User avatar
Lucifer
Level 3 Star User
Level 3 Star User
 
Posts: 1525
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Hades

by fp » Wed Nov 23, 2005 10:47 pm

Lucifer wrote:Okay, here goes. It is surprising to most people, but velocity of light is a scalar quantity. Read on:

Parallelogram Law of Vector Addition wrote:If two vectors P and Q can be represented in magnitude and direction by two adjacent sides of a parallelogram drawn outwards from a point, then their vector sum R is the diagonal of the same parallelogram drawn outwards from the same point.

The magnitude and direction of the vector sum R are given respectively by:

Image

Now, a quantity is vector if and only if it:
1. has magnitude
2. has direction
3. obeys the parallelogram law of vector addition

In the case of the velocity of light, condition no. 3 is not adhered to. For example, if we have two light beams in vacuum adding them up does not give us a resultant light beam that has a speed more than that of the incident light beams in vacuum because there is nothing that travels faster than the speed of light in vacuum.

Sad, no one gets the ice cream.




actually ... its neither ...

since a scalar quantity must NOT have a direction , light cannot be a scalar ...

nor is it a vector ( as proved dazzlingy in lucy's post above)



:shock:



** demands a nobel prize for shaking physics to its foundations **



**might settle for a crappy ice cream**
User avatar
fp
Registered User
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 6:41 pm

by Lucifer » Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:32 pm

fp wrote:actually ... its neither ...
since a scalar quantity must NOT have a direction , light cannot be a scalar ...
nor is it a vector ( as proved dazzlingy in lucy's post above)

:shock:

** demands a nobel prize for shaking physics to its foundations **

**might settle for a crappy ice cream**

That is not quite true. Read on.

Scalar wrote:A quantity that can be fully defined by its magnitude alone is called a scalar quantity.


It does not mean that it should not have a direction. A scalar quantity does not necessarily need to have direction. It may. But its magnitude is sufficient to completely define it.
Nothing travels faster than light with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws.
-- Douglas Adams
http://artfilm.fullhydblogs.com/
User avatar
Lucifer
Level 3 Star User
Level 3 Star User
 
Posts: 1525
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Hades

by spamtaneous » Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:00 am

are u making up this stuff :roll:
User avatar
spamtaneous
Level 1 Lord
Level 1 Lord
 
Posts: 2431
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:42 pm

by Lucifer » Fri Dec 02, 2005 10:25 am

spamtaneous wrote:are u making up this stuff :roll:


:shock: No one, I repeat, no one has ever tried to deface my integrity as Spamtaneous has. I took my physics seriously and I don't take very kindly to people questioning the legitimacy of my physics without doing proper research.



Please read the folowing links:



http://www.plus2physics.com/vectors/study_material.asp?chapter=2

http://hemsidor.torget.se/users/m/mauritz/math/vect/vadd.htm

http://www.plus2physics.com/vectors/study_material.asp



Kahan kahan se log aa jaate hain... :roll:
Nothing travels faster than light with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws.
-- Douglas Adams
http://artfilm.fullhydblogs.com/
User avatar
Lucifer
Level 3 Star User
Level 3 Star User
 
Posts: 1525
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Hades

by spamtaneous » Fri Dec 02, 2005 10:52 am

just asking boss...staap being a bitch... :evil:
User avatar
spamtaneous
Level 1 Lord
Level 1 Lord
 
Posts: 2431
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:42 pm

by pingu » Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:05 am

Lucifer wrote:
spamtaneous wrote:are u making up this stuff :roll:

:shock: No one, I repeat, no one has ever tried to deface my integrity as Spamtaneous has. I took my physics seriously and I don't take very kindly to people questioning the legitimacy of my physics without doing proper research.

Please read the folowing links:

http://www.plus2physics.com/vectors/study_material.asp?chapter=2
http://hemsidor.torget.se/users/m/mauritz/math/vect/vadd.htm
http://www.plus2physics.com/vectors/study_material.asp

Kahan kahan se log aa jaate hain... :roll:


i dont think he was "defacing your integrity" ... and your hardly appearing before an Inqusistion ... or defending your portable fusion reactor before a phd commitee ... so less of the martyrdom..ease up a bit, lucy.


lucifer wrote:Scalar wrote:
A quantity that can be fully defined by its magnitude alone is called a scalar quantity.

It does not mean that it should not have a direction. A scalar quantity does not necessarily need to have direction. It may. But its magnitude is sufficient to completely define it.




but this is pretty interesting stuff...

i dont understand "completely define" ... if the direction may be specified but is not needed ... then is it needed at all ...

and if its not needed thens its a scalar (according to the definition)

do you have any examples to explain further what you were talking about? im afraid i dont really get it ...
User avatar
pingu
Registered User
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 6:41 pm

PreviousNext      

Return to Special Interest Groups

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron
ADVERTISEMENT
SHOUTBOX!
{{todo.name}}
{{todo.date}}
[
]
{{ todo.summary }}... expand »
{{ todo.text }} « collapse
First  |  Prev  |   1   2  3  {{current_page-1}}  {{current_page}}  {{current_page+1}}  {{last_page-2}}  {{last_page-1}}  {{last_page}}   |  Next  |  Last
{{todos[0].name}}

{{todos[0].text}}

ADVERTISEMENT
This page was tagged for
raman scattering is an inelastic scattering of a photon which creates or annihilates an optical phonon. it was first reported in 1928 by c.v. raman and k.s. krishnan, and independently by grigory landsberg and leonid mandelstam
amperes law using thermacols
experiments with vacuum in victorian england parlours
Follow fullhyd.com on
Copyright © 2023 LRR Technologies (Hyderabad) Pvt Ltd. All rights reserved. fullhyd and fullhyderabad are registered trademarks of LRR Technologies (Hyderabad) Pvt Ltd. The textual, graphic, audio and audiovisual material in this site is protected by copyright law. You may not copy, distribute or use this material except as necessary for your personal, non-commercial use. Any trademarks are the properties of their respective owners.