Subatomic particles can be seen as either a particle/wave depending on the experiment.Have I missed something?
820557
It's only a paradox if you think of particles and waves as distinct entities, which in quantum terms they aren't - they're waveparticles. This is somewhat unintuitive, but the UC Berkeley lecture video in the source below contains the clearest explanation I've seen yet.
230711
People sort of understand waves and they understand particles, light might be a disturbance in the space time continum. Just a definate bit energy with an uncertainty where it is, traveling. Some "particles" exist for such a short time , they are more a resonance. I am looking forward to new research and thoughts on nature of light.
744739
Impossible.  There's no layman's equivalent to the concept of an object with no radius (true point) having angular momentum.  Nuclear particles have electromagnetic radii, but their mass is not distributed over that spherical area, so gravitationally subatomic particles are true points)  \n\nNot only that, but instead of having a continuum of possible momenta, subatomic particles can only have a small number of precise momenta (hence the "quantum" in quantum physics)\n\nSo you need to picture a point in space that behaves like it's spinning around a center of gravity, but it has no center of gravity because it has no radius.  And it spins at three speeds: -1, 0, and 1.  (some particles are + and - 1/2)  But there's no in between, and transitions are literally instant. \n\nThe bottom line is, what makes quantum physics so difficult conceptually is that it has very little to do with the physical world we are used to.  The rules are completely 100% different at that small of a scale, and since we will never be able to shrink down to that level to actually see it, all we can do is describe our observations mathematically.  But there's no way to accurately depict this stuff visually because it's like nothing we've ever seen or will ever be able to see.\n\nIt's the mystery of the quantum universe!
78979
None, sound is a wave not a particle. Sound is just a wave of vibrations travelling through atoms.
10601
This is one of those wierd questions in Quantum Mechanics where there is no way to visualize the answer. Our brains, understandably, have evolved to handle falling rocks, jumping tigers, and other macroscopic objects. We have numerous hardwired responses to these things which follow classical, Newtonian Physics.\n\nOn the atomic and subatomic scales where objects behave according to the laws of Quantum Mechanics things are different. An electron can behave like a wave in this experiment, but a particle in another experiments. According the classical physics (and our macroscopic-loving brain's "common sense) nothing can be *both* a particle and a wave. \n\nSo what is an electron? A wavicle? A partiave? \n\nNope. An electron is a, well, an electron. Sometime it will behave *exactly* like a wave, other times it will behave *exactly* like a particle. Never will it behave like some intermeditate or mixed state.\n\nThe problem - to the extent there is a problem - is that we cannot visiualize this. There is no way to form a picture in our heads the same way we can form a picture of a ball flying though the air. Our brains are meant to operate on macroscopic phenomena, and subatomic phenomena just behave differently.\n\nPresumably some other alien species could have some sort of mind, or mind-like thing, for which the whole wave-particle duality thing just makes perfect sense! But presumably this aliens would be confused by what are to us the simple motions of a ball flying through the air.\n\nSo, in the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, there is no sense in which the "other forms" of an object change after a wavefunction is collapsed. That this seems to be a problem is more a function of our brains and how they have evolved.\n\n\n(As an aside, it should be said that it is possible to understand the mathematics underlying Quantum Mechanics. And to be able to use this math to make extremely accurate predictions of how electrons, atoms, etc. will behave. These predictions can be tested experimentally and Quantum Mechanics holds up extremely well. \n\nSo while QM is very wierd, there is an enormous amount of evidence that it is correct.)
620171
It is in thoery possible to convert all of the elemental particles into energy and transport that energy to a remote location. The energy could then in theory be reasembeled into particles. However in quantum mechanics there is the priciple of uncertainty. Both the position and momentum of any particle cannot be known with arbitrary certainty. This is not a result of precision measurement more that the particle itself cannot know. So what you put together at the other end will not be the same.
12647
What might cause some confusion is that the electron resides in an "electron shell", and some theorize that the electron can be at any position in that shell at any time.\nMost do consider the electron a particle, but it depends on how you define the behavior.
223573
Both. Electrons and photons behave similarly. Even protons and neutrons are subject to that intensity distribution - but only so long as you don't force a collapse of the wave function (i.e. observe their path, thus making the wave function real).
441255
Light shows dual behavior as both wave and particle. The wave behavior is observed when we see defraction of light when it passes through slits. Also, we can observe light showing particle behavior. These small packets of light are called quanta, hence the lable quantum.
401428
Basically no. The idea behind subatomic physics is that when things get stuck together, you have to put energy into them to split them apart. (just like "real" physics). The tighter they are stuck together, they more energy it takes to split them apart. And the smaller they are, the tighter they are stuck together.\n\nQuarks are stuck together into subatomic particles so tightly that we need to build even bigger more powerful "atom smashers" to bust them loose; big "racetracks" miles across where the electrons can wind up faster and faster until they get released at the target. Costs a LOT to build. Until then, they're just a theoretical toy.\n\nAs for 'colors', that's just a name they made up to classify them by, doesn't apply to anything real. Same as the properties they call 'strangeness' or 'charm'.
305772
Seems to me that if you can manipulate 2 particles into entanglement (let's say one in New York, one in LA), then you can also manipulate a third particle (in Chicago) to the qualities measured in the first.  Sorry mathematician, but your two/three particle wave function theory although fascinating doesn't apply
1154260
Yes! in the Sub Atomic particle. Photons behave the same way.
1065955
Yes, the W boson is very massive, and what is actually emitted in neutron decay is a virtual W boson.  In quantum mechanics, rules of conservation of energy can be violated for short periods of time.  Virtual particles are common in subatomic interactions, if you don't see the word "virtual", note that physicists will sometimes refer to them as "particles off the mass shell".\n\nVirtual particles are not just mathematical fictions.  If a virtual W boson were to interact with another particle during its short existance, it could exchange enough energy/momentum with that particle to become a real boson itself (albeit one that will still decay in a short time because of the finite lifetime of real W bosons).\n\nVirtual particles are absolutely necessary in particle physics in order to model the behaviour correctly.  Even the attraction of positively and negatively charged objects is explained by the exchange of virtual photons.
385817
It depends on how you look at it. Precognititve abilities could be nothing more than an ability to read quantum probabilities a little ahead of time...\nThere's a bizarre phenomenon in quantum physics called Wave-Particle Duality. What this means is that the electron is essentially both a particle and a wave at exactly the same time, until you observe it with expectations. If you expect it to be a wave, it kind of "decides" to be a wave. if you expect it to be a particle, it "decides" to be a particle. So the act of observation appears to actually alter the universe at a very low level - there's an argument (and remember, I did SAY it was bizarre!) that no event is decided until it's observed; the next card off the top of the pack doesn't "decide" to be the Ace of Hearts until you observe it as such. So tests for precognition might simply reveal an extended ability to read these quantum outcomes before they're fully decided upon. If that's the case, then they should work just as well on the net as somebody making you guess what's shown on a pack of cards in the same room as you.\n\nIf by psychic you mean the ability to do a number of other things - see auras, convey messages from those who've passed etc - you might do better talking to a local spiritualist church. You don't have to "join" or anything, but any spiritualist group should be able to help you discover what you can currently do, and might be able to give you techniques to help you develop these sorts of abilities.\n\nHappy hunting.
561479
here is a good article on subatomic particles:\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subatomic_particle\n\nhere is a list of subatomic particles\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_particles\n\nhere is the chronological time-line of discovery of subatomic particles:\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_particle_discoveries\n\nall the above pages link to pages about each particle.
215021
Quantum mechanics is the wave particle duality.  \n\nQuantum mechanics defines particles as waves that are governed by the schodinger wave equation.  (or Dirac equation)\n\none of the results of quantum mechanics is that if you define a particle to exist at a single point then in a few moments it will begin to spread out in to a wave such that it exists over a small volume.\n\n\nNote added after seeing the answer below... \n\nThe Heisenberg Uncertanty Principle is found as a consequence of quantum theory
1021
Gamma rays have a dual property as it consists of an electromagnetic waves .. which means they are particles and at the same time waves (like the light)