Mr. Khan, this question is truly brainstorming.

Quantum mechanics is a realm of knowledge where everything is purely statistical in nature, for example we only talk about electron waves/cloud. Nothing can be thought of as stationary.

My opinion says that the particles have "observed" properties as long as they are in motion as waves. The moment the particles are stationary they are "dead".

Energy and mass are the same entities and are related by E = mc^2 OR m = E/c^2 (means mass of energy is calculated).

Dear Barbara Sawicka

Thanks for a nice contribution, "particle in box" is a helping approach to get understandings for further exploration. However, the "potential level" differences might can independent from behavioral aspects ?

Regards,

Dear Manoj Kumar Dabi

Thanks for deep view on questions. as you wrote "The moment the particles are stationary they are "dead".

So first the same question 

1) Do the "potential level" differences might can independent from behavioral aspects ?

2) Do that "dead" stage or state is dead in real? as if dead or de-structured then it should be convert back to some other basic formation, what that can be ? if not dead in real then what will be the scope of any intermediate or transitional stages with functional and structural aspects?

Regards,

Dear Arno

Thanks for your nice input. Why just two behaviors are associated with energy i.e. particle and wave function? Don't they create limitations for any other expression of energy?

Regards

In the regime of quantum mechanics, particles have wave nature as well. See for example the following link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave–particle_duality

Dear dr. Khan,

your question is very interesting, but very long, indeed. Let me try to give a partial answer. The two pictures, that light is either a particle or a wave, were originally put forward in the framework of mechanics by Newton and Huygens respectively. Once optics is split into ray-optics and interference/diffraction phenomena, those two pictures explain complementary features of light.

The energy approach was introduced later on in thermodynamics, to take heat transformations into account. In biology, energy is considered much like a currency: it is released in the sequence of catabolic pathways, and is finally converted into a form useful during muscle contraction, for example.

Quantum physics, on the contrary, faces the problem at a level more fundamental than Newton/Huygens' one. When dealing with Compton's scattering experiments, impinging light (in fact, they were X-rays) is not homogeneously scattered in all directions. To take this fact into account, quantum mechanics introduces an impulse vector besides energy, as dr. Gorgels says.

Dear Dr. Khan,

By saying "dead" I opine that stationary particles perhaps tend to lose quantum properties and are liable to annihilation or decay (or hypothetical decay as of a Proton).

We should not forget here that quantum physics is purely statistical and there, in the quantum world, are no differences between ILLUSION and REALITY. A particle can take all possible configurations and all possible positions at precisely the SAME TIME. There, mechanical laws break down and I believe the classical concept of "mass" as we know it, is obsolete. Only energy prevails and as I said in my earlier post m = E/c^2 holds true.

So, the so-called "wave" and "particle" are merely "avatars" of matter, nothing else.

The Wave-Particle duality will exist as long as Heisenberg's Uncertainty exists.

In the Quantum Field Theory, the field itself is imaginary and is considered to be in duality with particles suggesting Field-Particle duality.

Regards,

MKD

Dear Manoj Kumar Dabi 

Thanks for a nice explanation of wave particle duality with reference to quantum theory. 

Why just two behaviors are associated with energy i.e. particle and wave function? Don't they create limitations for any other expression of energy?

Regards

Dear Sara Liyuba Vesely 

Thanks, you contribution is very helping.

Regards,

Dear Dr. Khan,

The most dangerous thing in dealing with quantum physics would be "presumption" and believing "observed reality". In other words, we consider "truth" is what is "perceived" or "observed". This must be abandoned before we think about quantum world.

As I have already discussed, quantum world is a complete mess of probabilities. Matter exists merely as probabilities of energy distribution or so-called waves.

I again emphasize here that all laws of physics which are "observed" and "experienced" in our daily lives are completely broken or disobeyed in quantum world. These laws don't explain any of the phenomena in that world.

In our "observed" world we are only able to find two forms of energy/matter which are "particle" and "wave".

And, if the scenario mentioned in the above para is considered, do you still think we have discovered ALL POSSIBLE forms of energy/matter??

In my philosophy, off course not !!

We advocate "particle" and "wave" because only these have been "observed' till date. Things in the universe are far and far beyond just our "observations" and "measurements".

We have to prepare our minds to imagine and accept far beyond the physical laws (like we can not accept existence of 11 dimension world which are pre-requisites of string theory). 

This is why I am of strong belief that Relativity and Uncertainty will never permit us to know all the deep secrets of the creation.

This is what I call GOD!!

Regards,

MKD

Dear Manoj Kumar Dabi

Thanks for your input.

Human acquired knowledge of Physics is more certain, reliable and probable along testify-able, justifiable dynamic laws as its result of Human Efforts, Strength & Determination THAN the any concept of stagnant god along none-desirable relative god-ness.

Anyhow back to the question, what can be any other behaviors are associated with energy except than particle and wave?

Regards,

Both particle and wavefunction are constructs of the observer in imposing a space-time frame of reference. Reality consists only of quantum eigenstates.

Dear Christian Baumgarten

Thanks for your kind advise.

You might can assume that questions are raised by a person with out formal & patterned academic education of physics at postgraduate level , even can ignore any attained none-formal education & learning into physics but these questions don't sound an interested-layman-approach.

As formal & patterned academic education also serve the same purpose of learning after which one be able to understand the process and make ways to fulfill the quest for more knowledge into subject.

Anyhow formal & patterned academic education have some advantages as well, but sometime it restrict the brainstorming into the box of known knowledge as well.

As these questions are concerned to cover up in few sentences, then its Concept Summary kind of approach to clear up the hurdles in ways of though processing and generation of new thought. By such questions even any one with formal & patterned academic education into physics can get new ideas and ways of further thought processing.

Hope it satisfy, Anyhow i will try to read it more deeply, but i think much knowledge is not available on it, and Mathematics is not my good area of interest. So diversify & multidimensional approach of thought left for testing new ideas to go more deep. 

Regards,

The wave function is simply a way of describing the corresponding probability density, nothing more and nothing less. So it's pointless to waste time on technical issues as such.  It doesn't make sense to ask whether there's a particle without a wave function: there's a probability density and a wavefunction for any property of a physical system, in particular of a particle. The numbered questions are standard exercises-where they make sense. It might be useful to consult a course in physics, first, e.g. http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/

Dear Stam Nicolis

Thanks for your opinion & advice.

Particle with out wave function might not be a sensible idea at current models of physics but it can make sense if it discover in future, or such man made entity serve some required purposes.

Regards,

It depends on which particle we are talking about that.

The question is : Do all particles have wave function like photons ?

It is better to answer this question.

Do you want to generalize this item to all recognized particles ?

What is your idea about this item ?

I would be appreciated to ask this question by this form that i have proposed.

Dear Dr Hamed Daei Kasmaei 

Thanks, i already mentioned it in the last para of the questions.

"These questions are initially for basic elementary particle, subatomic particles specifically for Electron and Photon……. But any brainstorming is more than welcome for man-made theoretical/particle particles as well."

But your idea is very good approach to ask this question. "Do all particles have wave function like photons ?"

I am going to add it into the theme of questions.

Regards,

Maybe this recently published paper could bring a new perspective to many of your questions.

http://www.omicsonline.com/open-access/on-de-broglies-doubleparticle-photon-hypothesis-2090-0902-1000153.pdf

I have a theory that the universe is designed on basic principles. What those basic principles are called is dependent on their location. For instance, in the quantum world, particles have a wave function because all quantum travel is done through time. In our real world travel is done through space and the wave function on some types of particles (electrons) is electromagnetism. Einstein said things are run on space-time which is variable, however, the emphasizes is on either space or time depending on where space and time are located. I also suspect which is mentally off the wall that dark energy and dark matter is an exotic form of time which we currently view as simply a marker in our real world since we can only travel through space but you and I can't occupy the exact (x, y, z) location at the exact time (t).

 "Do all particles have wave function like photons?"  I agree with Arno Gorgels. See why on my website www.bergyl.no./en

http://www.bergyl.no./en

As  radio signals travel  in space by modulating a carrier, I understand that, similarly all wave particles  should follow the same process.

Regards,

-------------------------

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/world-i-understand-motor-generator-set-panagiotis-stefanides?trk=mp-reader-card

http://www.stefanides.gr