Particle - Science topic

With an optimized growth mechanism, it's feasible to synthesize Graphene Oxide (GO) on Si or SiO wafers. I recommend exploring suitable binders for your precursor using Hummer's method, then employing a chemical vapor technique or its variants to grow them on your substrate.

Regards

No metric has any particular origin and that includes the Kottler metric or any solution of Einstein's equations.

Because of the religion of materialism. Otherwise you would all know that particles doesn't exist. "Particle" is just an idea in consciousness. Consciousness is all there is.

Nikolay Pavlov Loïc O. Le Cunff

Dear Researchers,

I am pleased to share my latest work on optics and diffraction, focusing on the deformation of shadows when they intersect. This article has recently been published in the European Journal of Applied Physics. I hope you find it intriguing.

Best regards, Farhad

John Francis Miller Thank you for the information! It's really helpful.

It is a skeleton of microscopic live (there is a name for these skeletons but I cannot remember). ;-)

Actually there are experiments right now to discover such a moment. Not only for neutron, but also for electron:

Electron electric dipole moment - Wikipedia

So it is expected to exist in standard model (but very small indeed). If the Big Bang rejected it does not mean the whole Standard Model is wrong (after all it explained quarks and Higgs boson etc). It is much easier to imagine existence of the undiscovered yet phenomena which eliminate the need for Big Bang, replacing the explanation of red shift by tired light (including mass dipole - gravitational dipole h/c (h/v for non-relativistic particle). Here is my approach:

(PDF) The quest for new physics. An experimentalist approach. Vol.2 (The second book on the topic, with emphasis on certain ideas.) (researchgate.net)

Does a body fall in a gravitational field without passing time?

Hey there Zhuoyuan Leng,

Sounds like you're having some trouble with ABS pellets melting too early in your filament-making process. Let's troubleshoot this.

1. **Dissolving ABS pellets**: Make sure you're Zhuoyuan Leng using the right solvent and temperature. Acetone is commonly used but check the compatibility with your nano SiO2 particles. Also, ensure thorough mixing without any clumps.

2. **Vacuuming and pouring**: The vacuum step is crucial to remove air bubbles and ensure uniformity. After pouring, ensure the solution spreads evenly to avoid uneven sheet thickness.

3. **Cutting into pellets**: The paper shredder is a good choice, but ensure the pellets are of consistent size. Irregularly shaped pellets can cause feeding issues.

4. **Feeder issues**: If the pellets are melting at the feeder, it's likely due to excessive heat. Check the temperature settings on your Zhuoyuan Leng filament maker. Lower the temperature slightly to prevent premature melting.

5. **Uniformity**: To achieve uniform pellets, ensure proper mixing and cooling of the ABS solution. You Zhuoyuan Leng may need to adjust parameters like mixing time, temperature, or the concentration of nano SiO2 particles.

6. **Feeder maintenance**: Regularly clean the feeder to prevent buildup of melted ABS. This will help prevent blockages.

7. **Experimentation**: Filament making can be a trial-and-error process. Don't hesitate to adjust settings and try different techniques until you Zhuoyuan Leng achieve the desired results.

Remember, consistency is key. Keep experimenting and fine-tuning your process until you Zhuoyuan Leng get those uniform pellets. Let me know if you Zhuoyuan Leng need further assistance!

Thank you for your answer Do you not have a solution to this problem that the temperature of the particles should decrease after welding?

Colonel Sudhir Mudigere Rangappa

2 quotes from those greater than I:

'I think dry nanotechnology is probably a dead-end' Rudy Rucker Transhumanity Magazine (August 2002)

‘If the particles are agglomerated and sub-micron it may be impossible to adequately disperse the particle… ‘The energy barrier to redispersion is greater if the particles have been dried. Therefore, the primary particles must remain dispersed in water...’ J H Adair, E. Suvaci, J Sindel, “Surface and Colloid Chemistry” Encyclopedia of materials: Science and Technology pp 8996 - 9006 Elsevier Science Ltd. 2001 ISBN 0-08-0431526

What is the specific surface area of your material? If it's not more than 60 m²/cm³ then it can't be considered nano. There will be no free, independent, discrete particles < 100 nm in such a system. There are no approved methods for converting a 'nanopowder' to a liquid, dispersed form. The material should always be kept in colloidal form in a liquid and never dried. Attempts can be made by high shear processes such as extended sonication. Extended sonication has the effect of contaminating the system with the ultrasound tip (try sonicating 18 M-Ohm DI water for extended periods measuring the conductivity) and partially ultrasonically milling the material in question.

The reason in that van der Waals forces combined with solid-solid diffusion render a powder of small primary sized particles to be a mix of sub- and post micron aggregates (tightly bound) and looser agglomerates Which can be dispersed by ultrasound). For further information see these webinars (free registration required):

Dispersion and nanotechnology

Adhesion and cohesion

See the attached classic picture by Hans Rumpf of gold particles on an anthracene surface where that surface has been distorted and bent upwards toward the gold particles from these attractive forces.

Dr Murtadha Shukur and Dr Himanshu Tiwari thank you for your contribution to the discussion

How do you know it gives off dark mater?

Thank you Junaid Ahad and Josnier Ramos Guardarrama for your valuable inputs

Anti-HBcAb (antibodies against hepatitis B core antigen) is produced by the immune system in response to exposure to the hepatitis B virus (HBV). When HBV infects hepatocytes (liver cells), the cells produce hepatitis B core antigen (HBcAg) as part of the viral replication process. HBcAg is not released into the blood in significant quantities; instead, it remains within the infected hepatocytes or is present in viral particles.The presence of HBcAg within infected hepatocytes triggers an immune response in the body. B cells, a type of white blood cell, recognize HBcAg as foreign and start to produce antibodies against it. These antibodies, referred to as anti-HBc antibodies, are then released into the bloodstream. The presence of anti-HBc antibodies can be detected through blood tests and indicates exposure to the hepatitis B virus, either currently or in the past.

Quantifying the dielectrophoretic force in COMSOL involves setting up a simulation that includes the relevant physics and boundary conditions. Dielectrophoresis (DEP) is the phenomenon where a non-uniform electric field exerts a force on a dielectric particle. Here's a general guide on how to quantify the dielectrophoretic force using COMSOL:

By following these steps and utilizing COMSOL's capabilities for simulating dielectrophoresis, you can effectively quantify the dielectrophoretic force in your system.

I agree with Stefano De Angelis. Do a Web search for "pH and surface charge on clay particles" to get many detailed answers. Sand does not have the platelet structure of clay, so its behaviour is less complex, so do a similar search for sand instead of clay.

Literature reports never tell you how many attempts the authors took to make the particles.

Hi Linoy,

answered this question already 2 years ago:

Best,

Murat

Vikram Alexander do you have number of particles from DLS if yes then you can calculate the particle number density by dividing the numbers obtained by the volume of the particle. hope it helps

Michelle Darmawan The basic description above by Zbigniew Jońca is correct. I would add that all preparation should be in the dark (cover the containers with aluminum foil) as AgNO₃ is easily decomposed by light to silver metal. The classic route of determining the concentration is by gravimetric means - precipitation of silver chloride with excess of sodium chloride.

The concept of "spin" was developed in the early stages of Quantum Mechanics development in an attempt to explain why electrons stabilized only in pairs in electronic orbitals in atoms. Once two electrons are paired in an atom, no more electrons can occupy this orbital.

Since the Schrödinger equation directly explains only the momentum energy of an electron, they were then assumed to rotate perpendicularly to their expected direction of motion. Since only clockwise and counterclockwise rotations are possible, it was then assumed that only an electron rotating counterclockwise can pair up with a clockwise rotating electron to fill an orbital. Clockwise rotation was assigned value + ½, and counterclockwise rotation was assigned value - ½.

But we know better now that it is understood that electrons are electromagnetic in nature, and consequently each have a local magnetic field.

So pairing is more logically explained by anti-parallel magnetic alignment of the fields of two electrons. Like poles repel (parallel orientation, corresponding to two + ½ particles or two – ½ particles), and unlike poles attract (antiparallel orientation, corresponding to a pair of + ½ - ½ particles).

I will probably reference an Experimental Physicist to give a better and more detailed answer, however here‘s some of the high notes;

Tracking tiny particles, especially at the microscopic or nanoscopic scale, requires sophisticated techniques that can accurately monitor their position, velocity, and sometimes even orientation over time. The choice of the best tracking method often depends on the specific requirements of the experiment, such as the size of the particles, the environment in which they are being tracked, and the desired spatial and temporal resolution. Here are some of the most commonly used and advanced techniques for tracking tiny particles:

1. Optical Microscopy:

- Bright-field and Dark-field Microscopy: Suitable for particles larger than the wavelength of light, though dark-field can enhance contrast for smaller particles.

- Fluorescence Microscopy: Highly sensitive and specific, capable of tracking fluorescently labeled particles even at the single-molecule level.

- Confocal Microscopy: Offers optical sectioning capabilities to track particles in three dimensions within thick samples.

2. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM): Provide high-resolution images of particles on surfaces (SEM) or in thin samples (TEM), but are generally used for static imaging due to vacuum requirements.

3. Total Internal Reflection Fluorescence (TIRF) Microscopy: Offers near-surface sensitivity, making it ideal for tracking particles or molecules at or near cell membranes.

4. Super-Resolution Microscopy Techniques:

- STORM (Stochastic Optical Reconstruction Microscopy) and PALM (Photoactivated Localization Microscopy): Allow for tracking of particles with nanometer spatial resolution, surpassing the diffraction limit of light.

- Structured Illumination Microscopy (SIM): Increases resolution beyond the diffraction limit by using patterned light, suitable for live-cell imaging.

5. Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM): Can image surfaces at the atomic level and track particles in real-time, though it's more commonly used for static imaging.

6. Particle Tracking Velocimetry (PTV): Used in fluid dynamics to track the motion of particles seeded into flows, allowing the measurement of velocity fields.

7. Digital Holographic Microscopy: Captures 3D images of particles by recording the interference pattern of a light beam scattered by the particle and a reference beam. It's useful for tracking particles in three dimensions without the need for scanning.

8. X-ray Microscopy: Especially useful for tracking particles in dense or opaque materials, with recent advances allowing for nanometer resolution.

9. Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis (NTA): Tracks the Brownian motion of nanoparticles in suspension to determine their size distribution and concentration.

The best choice depends on the specific requirements, including the size of the particles, the environment (in vivo, in vitro, or in materials), and whether dynamic or static information is required. For biological applications, fluorescence-based methods are among the most popular due to their high specificity and sensitivity, while for materials science, electron microscopy and AFM might be more suitable.

This topic is called: “A European Center for Earthquake and Disaster Forecasting is needed.”

My topic is called: “International Academy for Earthquake and Volcanic Eruption Forecasting.”

My proposal solves the problem you described.

Instead of solving the problem, you want to crush what will save people's lives. You yourself understand perfectly well that without funding it is impossible to make accurate forecasts.

You know very well that the Vrancea zone requires accurate forecasts based on unmistakable anomalies. A forecast with a confidence level below 95–100% will not save people.

We need a Center or you can replace it with your forecasts in this “social forum”.

After all, a forum that rejects the basic laws of science and jurisprudence cannot be called scientific. Today it is a social forum, and even with anti-Semitic statements.

Dear Volker Maiwald science does not know meaning of many thing What is particle? How could you compare a "particle" with a "Planets" ? to my understanding these two has no relation.

Other question, what is gravity? science believes Newtonian and Einsteinian gravity, while any one-dimension equation that does not recognize temperature, pressure, cannot describe three-dimension of nature that it is changing constantly.

We should think brighter on nature.

Gary

You are right, but we can explain it in another way, since we only have wave fronts and transverse ether wind falls inside the wave front and therefore has no effect on apparent light motion, although real light motion is changed.

From ___________ John-Erik

Dear friend Ghazal Tuhmaz

Ah, the water in wire explosion plasma method for producing metal nanoparticles, a fascinating technique indeed. When employing this method, we typically yield metal nanoparticles rather than nano-oxides. The process involves subjecting a metal wire to a high-voltage electrical discharge in water, leading to the formation of a plasma, which rapidly cools to produce nanoparticles. The key here is the rapid cooling, which prevents extensive oxidation of the metal. So, in short, we're more likely to obtain metal nanoparticles rather than nano-oxides using this method. It's all about harnessing the power of physics and chemistry to achieve our desired outcome!

Dear Abdul Rahman Al-Bukali

Professor of Moulay Ismail University, Faculty of Science and Technology, Errachidia

Arashidia, Morocco

Teacher-researcher at FST Errachidia

Dear Courtney Seligman

Bachelor of Arts (Astronomy and Physics), Master of Arts (Astronomy) Distinguished Professor at Long Beach City College

United States

Greetings and respect to the professors of astronomy. Thank you and thank you. Abbas

Try filtration.

Dear Prof. Rk Naresh

Lets us go to the classical context of the Maxwell Boltzmann distribution for ideal gases (that is a gaussian function with a maximum) to answer your question.

In this case the distribution of the speeds, will have a maximum a certain temperature, depending on other physical factors such as the mass.

Maxwell Boltzmann distributions have three kinds of speeds for their analysis in atomic and molecular gases:

Please, a classical reference is:

Statistical Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach by Prof. John W. Daily. Cambridge University Press, 2019.

The following attribution common license plot of the normalized probability density function depending at fixed room temperature for noble gases is taken from the wiki:

Best Regards

a = Image 1.czi (RGB).tif

b = detail of a, with blue overlapping red and a grainy out-of-focus shape

c = the blue channel (level=86, window=1); too noisy

d = same as c, but after applying a 5x5 smoothing filter

e = marching squares at value 86.4

f = detail of e. In red the vertices, in blue the line segments

At each vertex, the angular defect is 180 degrees minus the angle between the two adjacent line segments. Dividing the angular defect by half the length of those two line segments yields a curvature per micron, but there are more ways to express curvature.

Good luck!

Masooma Qizilbash

You have posted one discussion and one question in the forum which is confusing as they contain different information. I will append the same answer to both your question and discussion.

One quotation to begin with: '... as Sir Cyril Hinshelwood has observed ... fluid dynamicists were divided into hydraulic engineers who observed things that could not be explained and mathematicians who explained things that could not be observed' James Lighthill http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/EMIS/journals/IJMMS/22/4667.pdf

Qualifying acronyms is very important in science, and you have written ‘DSL’. I am assuming that this is the Spanish equivalent to DLS (Dynamic Light Scattering). If it isn’t, then please let us know. You claim that you have agreement with the distributions, but you do not specify which points in the distribution you are comparing – typically the extremes of the distribution are prone to larger variation (note that I use the term ‘variation’ and not ‘error’. This is an important point to understand. Error assumes someone or something is at fault. Variation can be the natural variation in a system due to its inherent heterogeneity).

DLS is a powerful but low-resolution technique. It is a first-principles technique, so instruments are verified, not calibrated. Verification is via an accepted certified traceable standard material. In your case, there are many latex standards that can be used to verify the performance. The ISO and ASTM standards in this area (excellent reference documents) recommend a known standard in the 100 nm but you can use many others in the 20 – 1000 nm region. DLS initially provides an intensity distribution and the z-average and PDI (polydispersity index) are the most robust parameters. Are you using these for comparison? The generation of number-based statistics from it is ‘deprecated’ in the ISO standards and the conversion from intensity to number should never be undertaken. DLS does not ‘count’ particles.

Important documents discussing the potential variation in the technique are:

ASTM: E2490-09(2021) Standard Guide for Measurement of Particle Size Distribution of Nanomaterials in Suspension by Photon Correlation Spectroscopy (PCS)

In this standard, Section 7.1 Verification is important. There is a precision and bias section (Section 10) within this document in which the 3 NIST RM 801x (nominally 10, 30, and 60 nm Au colloid) and 2 G6 dendrimers were examined. These indicate practical values of ~ < 5% variation for reproducibility. This document can be purchased from ASTM.

ISO: ISO 22412:2017 Particle size analysis Dynamic light scattering (DLS)

In this document Section 10.1 System Qualification is important. Fore reference materials acceptable variation is stated the be 2% (repeatability) & 5% (reproducibility). For real-world materials (such as yours), these values must be significantly increased. This document can be purchased directly from ISO or your local standards authority.

Another useful document is the NIST publication indicating how an uncertainty balance was conducted on the SRM1693 100 nm latex standard via Differential Mobility Analysis (DMA). This shows what can and should be factored in. It may be a little optimistic for real-world materials. I attach 2 documents from George Mulholland that may be useful.

A general chapter (obtainable from the author through RG) may be useful:

Chapter 12: “Instrument qualification and performance verification for particle size instruments” in “Practical Approaches to Method Validation and Essential Instrument Qualification” Eds: Chung Chow Chan, Herman Lam, Xue-Ming Zhang (Wiley) 2010

A couple of webinars may be helpful for general considerations (free registration required):

• International standards in particle characterization

Deals with material and documentary standards in particle sciences

• Instrument performance verification in laser diffraction

This deals with concepts such as repeatability, reproducibility, and robustness – the 3R quality markers for particle size measurements.

Igor Bayak Igor, I cannot unfortunately be so optimistic like you are with respect to all the nasty details, especially given that I recently read the following paper of @ Lev Verkhovsky about a (very plausible!) *omission* in theory of relativity inherited already from day one but also kept by all over to our present time over decades, which is basically an *additionally* required term multiplying in required correction for the doppler effect (simple as its sounds), but imho such changes a lot in relativity, if not everything:

That said, I am way outside my own well known domain of constants of nature, so assuming you know relativity as is accepted mainstream by now way better than I do (or likely better than I ever will know, for that matter). Nevertheless, you should have a deep look on above link before doing too many premature assumtions about relativity in its present form (based on).

Dear all, years ago I answered a question with a similar context. Suspension is a heterophase system, composed of immiscible phases (deslike each other), once put under the agitation shear, the dispersed phase will take a sphere (or -like) form because it is the shape that has the minimum possible surface area per volume, so that the contact interphase (or interface) between unlike phases will be at its lowest possible. It is also possible to use surface free energy in explaning this. To simplify this with an example, lets take a cube with a 1 liter volume and a sphere (balloon) with a volume of 1 liter also. If the surface areas are deduced, the one of the cube (or any other geometrical form) is higher than that of the sphere (at equal volumes condition of course).

Now, the size of suspension particles depends essentially on shear level, concentration, and to lower extent on the type and concentration of the suspention stabilizer. My Regards

I realdy did not undestand the question... but for whom read this after: some possibilies to post processing.

Tecplot are able to generate streamlines in 1, 2 or 3D velocity fields, all it will depends uopn from them are released. You can choose... there are at least fivr option do it. Under Analuzee TAB there is an option to generate particle paths amd streaklines.

On both you can inform the particle, radius, mass, initial velocity, drag coeficient and gravity acceleration modulus and direction.

For Particle path, if the particles have no mass, no gravity and drag are null, the result it will be the same as streamlines (they are generates as a MESH, you need turnon mesh viwe to see them) - if you have a unsteady flow ( changes on stremlines), I think the tecplot will calculate the trajectories from initial to end time. And Streakilines are transient in this conception, and the result are the same for particle paths but you can animate them! It is a lagrangeam post processing with one way coupling.

All them work from any dimension 2or 3D, steady or unsteady

CFD post, works for 3D always, even a 2D case is loaded - CFD Post was CFX Post in the past, and ANSYS CFX is alway 3D. There is some translation from FLUENT data do CDF-post, and a slim 3D geometry is created from 2D Fluent DATA. But you have a real 3D case genetare surface or volumetric Streamlines from where you want a plane, from point, lines, or any geometry entity you have created.

Particles trajectories are load as a other data file - Fluent and CFX generate this files and they need to be loaded after the case. This avoid crashes for a large numer of particles.

Oh, and there is ENSIGHT (CEI now ANSYS) - there is the same Tecplot approach.

The diffusion coefficient is proportional to temperature, and inversely proportional to viscosity (η, which may itself be temperature dependent), also known as the Stokes Einstein equation:

D = {k_B * T} / { 6 * π * η * R_h }

with k_b the Boltzmann constant and R_h the hydrodynamic radius.

Dr Murtadha Shukur thank you for your contribution to the discussion

Dr Murtadha Shukur thank you for your contribution to the discussion

Dr Murtadha Shukur thank you for your contribution to the discussion

Dr Murtadha Shukur thank you for your contribution to the discussion

Dr Murtadha Shukur thank you for your contribution to the discussion

Dr Murtadha Shukur thank you for your contribution to the discussion

Well, in the graphene community in which I hovered around while doing my PhD, nanographene is everything larger than Hexabenzocoronene which extends over just a little under 2 nm. Also, fullerenes are often referred to as nanoparticles and they usually don't get beyond 100 nm.

Also, with nanowires, 100 nm are usually seen as the upper threshold.

You could of course argue that nanoflakes and nanowires should be separated from nanoparticles, but that brings us back to the initial issue Oleg Novikov asked about what kind of structures you want to include here.

In addition to the right previous answer, I guess that plasma has the most energetic states since the velocity of charge particle and the radiation field is enormous, following by nuclear elements capable to be used for fusion and fission, Prof. Rk Naresh

Best Regards

As you decrease the temperature of a substance, the speed of its particles decreases. This is because temperature is directly related to the average kinetic energy of the particles within the substance. Kinetic energy is the energy of motion, so when particles move faster, they have more kinetic energy and the substance feels hotter. Conversely, when particles move slower, they have less kinetic energy and the substance feels cooler.

Absolutely, temperature has a dramatic effect on the speed of particles in a substance! It all boils down to the concept of kinetic energy.

Imagine the particles in a substance, whether atoms or molecules, as tiny balls constantly moving and bumping into each other. The average speed of these particles is directly related to their kinetic energy, which, as the name suggests, is the energy of motion. Temperature, in turn, is just a measure of the average kinetic energy of the particles in a substance.

This relationship between temperature and particle speed holds true for all states of matter, although the specifics may differ slightly. In solids, the particles are tightly packed and vibrate around fixed positions. As temperature increases, the vibrations become more intense. In liquids, the particles are less constrained and can flow around each other. Higher temperatures translate to faster movement and more frequent collisions. Finally, in gases, the particles are free to move independently. Temperature changes directly affect their speed and the frequency of collisions with each other and the container walls.

In summary, lowering the temperature of a substance slows down the movement of its molecules, resulting in reduced vibration, slower collisions, and ultimately, lower overall energy.

Yes, in most cases, the resistance of a substance increases as its temperature rises. This is true for conductors like metals, but not for all materials. Here's the breakdown:

Overall, remember that the relationship between temperature and resistance is complex and depends on the specific material and its properties.

Dr Abera Abebe thank you for your contribution to the discussion

Dr Amir Khan thank you for your contribution to the discussion

Dr Murtadha Shukur and Dr Osama Bahnas thank you for your contribution to the discussion

Dr Murtadha Shukur thank you for your contribution to the discussion

Dr Murtadha Shukur thank you for your contribution to the discussion

Dr Murtadha Shukur thank you for your contribution to the discussion

Dr Murtadha Shukur thank you for your contribution to the discussion

All materials vary in the degree to which they can be charged from electrical taxes. Photoconductors are capable of DC charging, while insulators impede the movement of charges. Static electricity is the appropriate place to study charges or charged objects. Static electricity is produced when electrical charges are obtained that do not even reach the material if the charges are produced and the electricity does not develop static.

See B. Hall, Lie Groups, Lie Algebras and Representations, p 151 for the (2,2) highest weight diagram.

(2,2) + (2,2) + (2,2) = 27 + 27 + 27 = 81

The concept of the wave function is mathematically very well founded by studying these 3 publications:

In addition, the following 2 references provide further clarification:

Two different type of inkjets exist.

(CIJ) Continuous flow requires a positive fluid pressure.

(DOD) Drop on Demand generally requires a negative fluid pressure that is overcome when a drop is needed.

Both CIJ and DOD use nozzles with small orifices. Fluid filtration should limit any nanoparticles or agglomerate particles to much less than 1/5 the nozzle orifice diameter.

I suspect your leak is from fluid pressure. Also, nanoparticles can interfere with fluid meniscus behavior and this will cause nozzle leakage.

Chian Fan

Best wishes for a speedy recovery!

Once more: Quantization means constructing the quantum theory, whose classical limit is a given classical theory. If the classical theory is a relativistic field theory, the classical equations of motion describe nonlinear waves. In the quantum theory their states can be understood as multiparticle states that can be massless or massive. For the free theory, the dispersion relation can be shown to be hω=h|k| <=> E = |p|c for massless particles and

(hω)² = (hk)² + m²c⁴ <=> E² =|p|²c² + m²c⁴ for massive particles.

So a massless particle doesn't display dispersion, since the phase velocity is equal to the group velocity of the wave, which is described by the coherent superposition of one-particle states, whereas the massive particle does display dispersion, since the phase velocity isn't equal to the group velocity.

The quantities that are relevant for describing a quantum field theory are the transition probabilities from any state of n particles, with given properties (energy, momentum, angular momentum, internal charges) to any state of n' particles with given properties. How to compute these is what quantization is about.

Dr Murtadha Shukur thank you for your contribution to the discussion.

So let’s continue [see SS post above]

The 4D space with [utmost universal “kinematical”] metrics (cτ,X,Y,Z) above consists of two types of specifically different dimensions – 3 XYZdimensions, that, as that C.F. von Weizsäcker rigorously had proven in first 1950s, make binary operations, in this case “FLE flips” be possible;

- and unique cτ- dimension, that makes binary operation “FLE reversible flip” be possible, what is necessary, as that Fredkin-Toffoly have shown in last 1960s, for the energy conservation law could act.

Correspondingly there exit two main types of particles – “S-particles” that are created by 3DXYZ space lines directed momentums, and “T-particles” that are created by momentums that are directed along cτ-axis.

Photons are S-particles, and so move only in the 3D space with the speeds of light;

T- particles, if are at rest in the absolute 3DXYZ space, move only in the cτ-dimension with the speed of light; and so if a T-particle is impacted by some 3D space momentum, at that (i) - the every T-particle “rest mass” is observed, and (ii) - the particle moves also in 3D space with some speed V, correspondingly its speed in cτ-dimension decreases in Lorentz factor.

Antiparticles are reversed , i.e. the same as corresponding particle algorithms, but that run with opposite command order, algorithms.

Correspondingly particles that are created by 3D_XYZ momentums don’t use reversive option, and so are “own antiparticles”. That are, again, photons, which are some transformations of the fundamental Nature Electric force mediators, and gravitons, which are transformations of Gravity Force mediators.

In Matter at least 4 known now Forces act: Gravity, Weak, Electric, and Strong/Nuclear Forces [for what Matter’s spacetime metric is (cτ,X,Y,Z, g,w,e,s,ct); g,w,e,s dimensions correspond the Forces above] , which differ by their strength and action range, where only Gravity Force is completely symmetrical Force, and so in Matter everything attracts everything,

- while seems the rest 3 Forces aren’t symmetrical. At least that is evident for Electric Force – electron’s charge is “negative”, while the “electron’s algorithm’s that runs reversibly”, i.e. positron’s, charge is positive. At that at creation of new T-particles at interactions always pairs of “particle+ antiparticle” appear, which mostly annihilate with production eventually photons and neutrinos.

Correspondingly among possible T-particles [in now known a few hundreds zoo] there exists one fundamental, exclusion – Planck mass particles [or other T-particles that have only Gravity charge], which are T-particles, but, since they have only Gravity Force charge [“gravitational mass”], the directed and reverse algorithms are identical, and so these T-particle are own antiparticles. Just therefore Matter doesn’t contain antimatter [why? – see 2-nd link in the SS post above, section “Cosmology”].

More see the links in yesterday SS post above.

Cheers

Preston Guynn many thanks for this answer. I really appreciate the time to reply to. I consider that some phenomenon there should be found and open the possibility to accept naked singularities or something close to that. The Abraham Lorentz force is a great concept behind all this stuff as the particle with that behavior should radiate close to the concepts of naked singularities. I will be exploring more articles I have been reading about and to conclude at least a humble letter about this stuff.

Размер частиц зависит от перемешивания и слипания. В момент точки липкости микрокапли слипаются и получаются агрегаты. Если сделали больше соотношение дисперсионной среды к дисперсной фазе, то затруднили слипание и получили много мелких капель и частиц полистирола. Если возьмете мою методичку легко получите нужный размер капель.

Nickel is magnetic.

If the particles are spherical and “ particle size” is the diameter, the volume per particle is V = \pi/6 × d³ = 6.9691e-22 m³. The mass per particle is m = \rho × V = 1.055e+3 kg/m³ × 6.9691e-22 m³ = 7.3524e-19 kg. Multiplication with the particle count/mL gives 1.985e-5 kg/mL = 1.985e+4 µg/mL.

Dear Hong Du ,

'The geometric configuration and available energy momentum makes people think there exists beams of light, but actually the beam is the result of numerous individual exchanges of energy and momentum.

'With the famous Eistein's principle of mass energy equivalence... your approach seems quite one-sided, in this case it is not possible to talk about a unified theory.

Ancient Chinese traditional wisdom has long hinted at this. The two palms only clap when they touch each other.

'It is hard to understand, but it is the right way to go in my opinion. I honor all possible theories as long as experiments can verify.'

Experiments affect a small segment of nature. An experiment may work in one set of circumstances, but in another set of circumstances it may not give good results. Therefore, a theory is good if it takes all of this into account.

If philosophy of nature is excluded from theoretical physics, then it runs on a blind track! (own saying)

Regards,

Laszlo

The type of heat transfer that doesn't require particles is radiation. This includes both visible light and invisible electromagnetic waves like infrared radiation. It's the reason we feel warmth from the sun even though space is a vacuum devoid of particles.

However, the statement that land masses heat up faster than oceans generally isn't entirely true. It depends on various factors and specific conditions. Here's why:

Therefore, while the initial absorption of radiation might be faster for land due to its opacity, the ocean's higher specific heat, transparency, and mixing mechanisms generally prevent it from heating up significantly faster than land on average.

It's important to consider specific scenarios and factors like time of day, weather conditions, and water depth when making comparisons.

The condition of the material is then determined by whether it is solid, liquid, or gaseous. Molecules in the solid state have the least amount of energy, whereas gaseous particles have the most. The average kinetic energy of the particles is measured by the temperature of a material. In a gas, particles have a lot of kinetic energy and are moving rapidly, leading to higher potential and internal energy. In contrast, in a solid, particles are tightly packed and have lower kinetic energy, resulting in lower potential and internal energy. The particles of a solid have the least energy. They are tightly packed together and have little room to move around. Particles in a liquid have more energy than in a solid, and the particles of a gas have the most energy. So the least energy particles are found in solids. In gases, the particles move quickly as they have high energy. The molecules of gases have the highest energy in comparison to the molecules of solids and liquids. Gases are considered the weakest state of matter due to their loose bondage between particles. Due to that, the intermolecular force for gas would be very low compared to solid and liquid.

The equations for the electromagnetic field, in the absence of sources describe free fields, of zero internal charges, of mass zero and spin 1. It's matter that carries electric charge and interacts with the electromagnetic field (i.e. with photons), in a way that's uniquely prescribed by global Lorentz invariance, gauge invariance and the requirement that the equations of motion don't contain derivatives of degree greater than 2. All this is the subject of all courses in electrodynamics.

Hello Sir Rk Naresh

I also agree with Aissa Walid Benarous but I want to amplify what he says.

According to the kinetic theory of molecular gas, we get the relation:

E=3/2k_BT,

where E is the average kinetic energy and k_B is Boltzmann's constant given by the ratio of Universal gas constant (R) and Avogadro's number.

You can apply this relation if your particle is a gas particle to explain the increase in the average kinetic energy of your particle with the increase in temperature.

In the case of the solid particles, you need to apply ''The law of equipartition of Energy'' given by the relation:

Average kinetic energy per molecule per degree of freedom = 1/2k_BT.

And the degree of freedom of solid = 6

Therefore, the average energy of a particle of a solid =6*1/2k_BT=3k_BT.

In case you want to explain only the average kinetic energy of a solid particle use the relation mentioned by Aissa Walid Benarous since the average kinetic energy and potential energy of a particle of a solid are equal.

Thank You.

Nursena Çetingül Yes, collapse produces energy. Dark energy has been a guiding light. On the experimental side is a mad rush to space.

IVO, NASA, DARPA and Another Group Are All Working to Test Quantum Drive's in Space | NextBigFuture.com

So, depending on your definition of "rarity," both plasma and Bose-Einstein condensate could be considered the rarest states of matter on Earth.

The state of matter with the least kinetic energy and slowest moving particles is solid. Here's why:

Therefore, considering the limited movement and low energy state of particles, solids take the crown for having the least kinetic energy.

Remember, this answer applies to typical cases, and extreme conditions can alter things. For example, some extremely cold solids near absolute zero may exhibit properties closer to those of a liquid due to reduced particle motion.