Using compton effect describe the dual nature of matter?
482458
Wave-particle duality of light in particular is observed in a number of experiments but only one or the other form.  To show this you will to explain 2 or more phenomena, for matter the photoelectric effect is the best example for waves there are plenty to choose from.\n\nThat however is for light, if you are talking about matter for example electrons as a wave, then you will have to use debrogle equation and explain a experiment like electron diffraction, where is acts as a probablility wave and builds up a diffraction pattern rather that each electron actually being considered as a wave.\n\nHope this helps
8936
Corresponding to each kind of particle, there is an associated antiparticle with the same mass and spin. Some particles, such as the photon, are identical to their antiparticle; such particles must have no electric charge, but not all charge-neutral particles are of this kind. The laws of nature were thought to be symmetric between particles and antiparticles until CP violation experiments found that time-reversal symmetry is violated in nature. The observed excess of baryons over anti-baryons in the universe is one of the primary unsolved problems in cosmology.
679319
Wow, Your question is so simple, but it's answer is researched for many decades now. \n\nAnyway, Any kind of energy (and the force is the mean in which the energy can be detected) requires the carrier, which is, well, material. Material carrier contains some kind of energy, in a certain amount. When the carrier collides with a body, it gives it's energy away to the body. In case of two carriers collision, a certain reaction occurs, and as the result, there is anoter type of energy or the carriers get destroyed, and their energy goes into heat or light. \n\nThe way of calculating an amount of energy that certain carrier contains, is the aplication of Einstein's formula of equality of the mass and the energy. If You are aware of the energy inside some particle, You can foresee it's influence to another particle.\n\nThe only force that is not connected to the appropriate particle is gravity (although there are some speculations about existence of so called "gravitones", as carriers of gravital energy and representers of the gravity force itself). \n\nThat unique force, which is not understood yet, makes Your question very heavy. Scientists from all over the world have been trying for more then 70 years to make the unified force theory, which could be used for calculations of any kind of force, with equaly accurate result. This would be named "The great unified theory of forces". So, let'hope that this theory will be defined soon, and that You will understand the duality force-matter better, by using it.
689936
electron is Negatively charged particle that revolves around the nucleus of an atom.IT shows dual character i.e; it has both wave character and particle character...one electronic charge is 1.609 * 10^-19......the wave length of an electron can be found using the formula lamda= h/mv..where h is the plank's constant 6.626*10^-34...m is mass of an electron 9.1*10^-31...v is its velocity...when supplied energy it gets excited and moves to high enegry orbital...then slowly radiate the energy and then move to their position...these radiations araethe colours seen when we heat substances...the color is due the wavelength of the radiations....the energy of an electron at infinity is 0...when it is near the nuclues...it does some work and energy is spent therefore near the nucleus he charge of an electron is -ve...thats all i can  remember...hope you slect mine...thanks....
49474
the current model of light recognizes the dual nature of light which depicts how light displays both properties of waves(ex: interference, diffraction, diffusion, refraction, etc.) and properties of matter(ex: photoelectric effect).  The reason for this is that although light does consist of waves, it also consists of tiny packets of energy called photons which occasionally display properties of matter.
649008
Antimatter is just like matter, except everything has the opposite charge. Instead of a proton, which has a positive charge, there is an antiproton, which has a negative charge. Instead of a negatively charged electron, you have its antimatter equivalent, a positron. Energy is produced when matter and antimatter meet and annihilate each other. If I were to use a mathematical analogy, matter and antimatter are like additive inverses (which cancel each other out). When you get to zero matter, that's when you get a whole bunch of energy. I found this website to be a pretty understandable explanation of how antimatter works and why, even though there is antimatter all around us, the universe does not explode.
1091953
Analyzing the interactions between and examining the existence of, particles.
853466
Equivalence.\n\nPhysics had long treated many things of being of entirely different natures.  Matter was concrete.  Absolute.  It followed laws of motion and the like.  Energy, on the other hand, was ethereal, zinging around and through the matter.  It is not ridiculous that physicists had thought this way - this is much of our experience of the physical world.\n\nE=mc^2, however, suggests that this is just not so.\n\nLiterally, it states that matter -IS- energy.  And conversely that energy is matter.  There is no 'special' status for one or the other.  Baseballs have a wavelength like any chunk of energy, and energy must occur in packets like any chunk of mass.  While quite simple in its statement, it is pretty staggering in its implication.\n\nFor example, it is used to explain how stars run (fusion turns minute amounts of mass into energy), explain the expansion of the universe (free energy turns into particle pairs which exert an outward pressure on space itself), and why photons which have no rest mass, can nonetheless push things around with impact (their speed and energy GIVE them mass).\n\nIf you want to use the equation itself, make sure your units match up.  If you use kilograms for mass and measure the speed of light in metres per second, energy will be in joules.  Hope that helps!
542057
Antimatter is as real as matter itself, just ask particle physicists\n\nThe reason we do not have much of it around us is that it annihilates with matter, so our world now is matter dominant.
338341
Anti matter is negative version of matter.To differentiate the matter and antimatter we consider the atomic levels of matter.Our own matter is made with atom of centraly proton of positive charge & charge less neutron called nucleus.And a negative charged electrons revolving around it.But in antimatter nucleus is  negative charged proton(anti proton)& electron of positive charge (anti electron) revolving around it.\nI think that matter and antimatter repell each other,have a negative gravitation.
214575
It is true that nobody knows. It is false that theories on the origin of matter are wild speculations. See an earlier post I did today on an almost identical question for a reasonable theory for the origin of matter out of nothing.\n\nIn short, the fact is that matter appears out of nowhere all the time. There's is no reason to think it could not do a slightly more extreme version of the same thing if the vacuum state were changed a little bit, ie. its energy density was increased.
47269
Matter is anything that has Mass and takes up space.  The general properties of matter are mass, weight, volume and density.   They are considered physical properties.\n\nLook around you and you will see matter.  Air is matter because it takes up space.  Heat and light does not have mass or takes up space, so it is not matter.  \n\nScientists have separated matter into states or phases.  Prior to 1985 there were 4 states or phases, today we have 5 states or phases.  Each of these phases certain properties associated with each phases.  Matter can be changed from one state or phase to another phase by energy.  There are five types of phase changes.
9631
I suppose you are referring to galaxies composed entirely or at least mostly of antimatter. None have been observed. If there were any, it would certainly be coming into contact with large amounts of matter at some sort of boundary. At that point, the collisions of the two would set off gigantic amounts of gamma rays, which we would be able to see. These have not, however, been observed. This is likely due to the fact that, for some reason as yet unknown, the amount of matter has increased hugely in the universe relative to antimatter since the big bang.
633928
The answer is "both" or "neither" depending on which theory you use.\nRelativity says that gravity is a bending of the fabric of space-time.  It is neither particle nor wave, but part of the geometry of the universe.\nNow, with quantum theory, and the Standard Model, gravity is a force that is carried by a particle.  Due to quantum weirdness, gravity would be both a wave and a particle, just like light is both waves and photons.
369730
Well, De Broglie's 'matter waves' explain that since energy also behaves to be particles just like matter, matter may also behave like waves as if they were energy waves. This supports the Bohr model. According to the Bohr model, each element has its own line spectrum because of the "electron jumps". If you would think about it, it seems too impossible for an electron to jump instantaneously from one position to another. There must be a way for the electron to displace, and that may be how matter waves came iinto the controversy. Electrons may behave just like energy waves, so they become continuous instead of discrete at certain times. And since electrons are so tiny, they are the ones that have a really detectable wavelength. The bigger the object, the smaller its wavelength. So, by its wave nature, the electron can move from one position to another.
535169
Matter and Anti-Matter
140934
Energy = mass times the speed of light squared\n\nIt conveys that a very small amount of matter actually represents/can be turned into a very large amount of energy, as in nuclear power, or a nuclear explosion.