wave-particle duality and TV reception

The whole science of RF seems to be based on wave theory. Does particle
theory have any place?

Discuss.

Bill

I thought the particle aspect of radio, or electromagnetic 'stuff', was that
the wave function is just the outcome of approximating the energy and the
quantum state, or guess of the position of the particle. it only becomes a
particle in a given place when something makes it become actually visible.

I've thought for a long time that time itself moves in jumps, but the
actual universe is in motion between our snapshots of the situation.
Since we are made of the stuff that is in motion, it is going to be hard
for us to pin anything down, as by definition it takes time to measure
things, and all I can see is that the universe has motion often affected by
its temperature. cool stuff enough and it acts like a single atom.
Unfortunately we cannot cool anything below a fraction of a percent above
absolute zero, as in order to cool things you need a place to be colder
that the item you cool which is impossible.

Yes, I saw the programme as well, before the second episode I need to
watch it again, it might be different next time, and the more times I watch
it the more precisely I'll know what I don't know.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
The whole science of RF seems to be based on wave theory. Does particle
theory have any place?

Discuss.

Bill

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
The whole science of RF seems to be based on wave theory.
Does particle theory have any place?

Discuss.



Looks like the RS Christmas Lectures this year will be
interesting - being delivered by a woman (name escapes me)
who is Professor of Radio Frequency Engineering at UMIST.


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

Are we going to see that old demo of the diy microwave? The one where a
waveguide is terminated by a sausage which gets cooked. Mind you, it could
well be a health and safety nightmare these days.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Woody" wrote in message
...
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
The whole science of RF seems to be based on wave theory. Does particle
theory have any place?

Discuss.



Looks like the RS Christmas Lectures this year will be interesting - being
delivered by a woman (name escapes me) who is Professor of Radio Frequency
Engineering at UMIST.


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

Brian Gaff wrote:

Snip

Yes, I saw the programme as well, before the second episode I need
to watch it again, it might be different next time, and the more
times I watch it the more precisely I'll know what I don't know.
Brian

Surely the process of observing the programme will change it.

--
Ashley

In article , Bill Wright
wrote:
The whole science of RF seems to be based on wave theory. Does particle
theory have any place?

In general the frequency ranges and power levels associated with 'RF' tends
to mean that you get a lot of photons for yer money. :-)

So in practice the photon approach only matters much in some specific
fairly extreme cases. e.g. if you're trying to work with ultra low signal
levels at very high frequencies and photon shot noise becomes a limit.

More usually the coherent properties matter far more, so wave theory makes
more sense.

That said, one possible place for photons is in 'explaining' the currently
trendy ideas of 'microwave beams with angular momentum'. But if you look
into that bear in mind that some of what it said may look baffling because
it is what academic jargon would call 'baloney'. :-)

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

I'd prefer a demonstration of Nicholas Kurti's inverted baked Alaska -
meringue cooked inside ice-cream, showing how microwaves are
differentially absorbed by ice and water.

Would be even better if the demonstration achieved Kurti's - probably
mythical - goal of using helium to acheive lighter-than-air meringue!

--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

In article ,
Robin wrote:
I'd prefer a demonstration of Nicholas Kurti's inverted baked Alaska -
meringue cooked inside ice-cream, showing how microwaves are
differentially absorbed by ice and water.

Would be even better if the demonstration achieved Kurti's - probably
mythical - goal of using helium to acheive lighter-than-air meringue!

how would you get them down from the ceiling?

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 08:12:29 -0000, "Woody"
wrote:

Looks like the RS Christmas Lectures this year will be
interesting - being delivered by a woman (name escapes me)
who is Professor of Radio Frequency Engineering at UMIST.

Yes, I find it genuinely encouraging that such creatures exist, as in
all the time I spent in broadcast engineering, I never met one. I
don't mean just professors of course; there were never female versions
of any kind of engineer (except a few I recruited myself, which
probably doesn't really count).

I expect the usual suspects, notably in the Guardian, will make the
usual noises about this, suggesting that the reason for it is some
kind of fiendish male plot to keep the girlies away from our technical
toys, but I've never seen any evidence of any such thing, rather the
reverse if anything. My life's experience, all the way from childhood,
would suggest that most girls and women avoid involvement in
technology because most of them are simply not interested.

Rod.

Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Bill Wright
wrote:
The whole science of RF seems to be based on wave theory. Does particle
theory have any place?

In general the frequency ranges and power levels associated with 'RF' tends
to mean that you get a lot of photons for yer money. :-)

So in practice the photon approach only matters much in some specific
fairly extreme cases. e.g. if you're trying to work with ultra low signal
levels at very high frequencies and photon shot noise becomes a limit.

More usually the coherent properties matter far more, so wave theory makes
more sense.

Jim


Thanks for that.

Bill