The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. On the Lighter Side
  3. New Theories
  4. The Measurement Problem
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

The Measurement Problem

  • 1 Replies
  • 3210 Views
  • 1 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline futuretime (OP)

  • First timers
  • *
  • 1
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
The Measurement Problem
« on: 13/03/2020 22:29:06 »
Post removed
« Last Edit: 13/03/2020 23:04:41 by Colin2B »
Logged
 



Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 81416
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 178 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: The Measurement Problem
« Reply #1 on: 13/03/2020 22:54:58 »
heh :)

Think I've seen that one before. Wasn't it Feynman that had some idea like that?
==

This was what it reminded me off

" The absorber theory is an attempt to explain the radiative reaction force felt by accelerating charged particles. As a particle accelerates, it transfers energy to other surrounding particles through electromagnetic radiation. Now, the crucial issue to understand here is that there is nothing in Maxwell's equations that causes an immediate reaction upon the emitting particle, which means the emitting particle is transferring energy to another particle without losing any bit of its own. This violates one of the most basic experimental observations, the conservation of energy.

Experimentally we do observe that energy is conserved and that the emission of an electromagnetic wave does impart a reaction upon the emitting charge. For example, an electron does descend to lower energy orbits (closer to the nucleus) as it radiates. Wheeler and Feynman, following an insight from Dirac, proposed that the loss of energy is due to the advanced (going back in time) response of the cosmos to the charge's radiation. When the radiation emitted by the original charge reaches the stuff of the universe, it makes it wiggle and emit back a wave that propagates backwards in time towards the original charge. That (back)radiation imparts on the charge a force which robs it of the excess energy it initially radiated (forwards in time).

Since this might be a bit confusing, let me sum it up:

    t=0: the charge wiggles

 from t=0 to t= 10s.: a retarded electromagnetic wave is emitted and propagates forwards in time away from the charge
   
 t=10s. (for example): a charge 3,000,000 km away from the first charge is put in motion by the electromagnetic wave
   
from t=10 to t=0s.: the motion of the second charge causes the emission of an advanced electromagnetic wave that propagates back in time away from the second charge

t=0: the advanced wave reaches the first charge and sets it in motion; the total effect caused by all the advanced propagators of all the charges in the future cosmos preserves energy conservation on the original charge and is identical to the observed radiation reaction.

Hope I was clear enough! "      By David De Sousa Seixas
« Last Edit: 13/03/2020 23:02:52 by yor_on »
Logged
URGENT:  Naked Scientists website is under threat.    https://www.thenakedscientists.com/sos-cambridge-university-killing-dr-chris

"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags: spacetime 
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.33 seconds with 34 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.