|
silence_kit posted:Particle physics and astrophysics are "high physics" though, and are more prestigious than the more practical fields like condensed matter physics. Correction, they think of themselves as more prestigious.
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2016 06:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 20:03 |
|
|
Pussy Cartel posted:We must abandon the bourgeois decadence of high energy physics research and relativity in favour of what really matters to people's every day lives, making more money here and now. I mean unironically but only narrowly so.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
Back in my day we just used the internet to warn our missile defenses of an impending Russian attack. I don't see whats so different?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2016 05:00
|
|
|
Elephant posted:Lasers carrying momentum/energy (and how much they carry) is a direct result of the theory of relativity. You need relativity to describe how a laser can have momentum, and how much energy it carries. No, you really don't need relativity to describe a laser. You need a quantum mechanical representation of electrons and light matter interactions but none of the systems need the relativistic Schrodinger equation to be represented. You can derive the phase matching geometry, the population inversion and stimulated emission with non-relativeistic theory.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2016 08:30
|
|
|
Dirk the Average posted:But yeah, long story short is that absorption/emission of photons is entirely described by quantum mechanics and is required for effective design and usage of a laser. It does you no good whatsoever to try to use a powerful laser to cut something if the material you're trying to cut reflects the wavelength of laser you're using. It can also be incredibly dangerous if you're trying to design a laser for, say, laser eye surgery, and you screw up and choose a laser that targets the cones in the eye instead of the cornea you actually want to reshape. Most laser cutters just use a big fuckoff CO2 laser and will cut anything regardless of the extinction.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2016 09:16
|
|
|
McDowell posted:Are you Andy Schlafly? You know, saying that a relativistic correction to the physics at room temperature, low velocity (which is where our current microelectronic devices operate) is exceedingly small is not the same as denying the existence of relativity.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:But without a solid understanding of condensed matter physics, which includes a number of nods from special relativity, you won't ever reach the point where you can build a semiconductor laser. It would absolutely be possible to develop most of modern semiconductor physics without the input of special relativity.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 20:03 |
|
|
QuarkJets posted:I've done this, you just keep handwaving away all of my posts and creating strawman arguments in their place. If you want to continue believing that special relativity is useless to the physics of lasers and MRI machines then I no longer feel compelled to stop you Not useless, just orthogonal.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2016 02:42
|
|
