Thought Provoker
Posts: 530
Joined: April 2007
|
Hi creeky belly,
You wrote...
| Quote | Another way to write deBroglie's equation is obviously:
lambda = h/p
Where lambda is the quantum wavelength. When the quantum wavelength of the object is comparable to its size (cube root of volume if you want), it will exhibit quantum characteristics. |
Did you read the link I provided?
p = momentum = mass * velocity
"size" neither volume nor the cube-root of volume has anything to do with momentum.
From the career survey results, I would have thought a majority of the people in this forum would be explaining this obvious physics property to you.
Was I too polite?
YOU SCREWED UP! LOOK AT THE LINK I PROVIDED.
Do you see the "m" in the first equation under the words "de Broglie relations"?
"m" stands for MASS!
| Quote | | Which does nothing to address the point that I raised...IOW: large molecule + room temperature = no entanglement |
Do you see temperature in deBroglie's equations too?
| Quote | | Again, maybe I missed it, but what was the last experimental quantum computation paper that Penrose wrote? Penrose can have all the theory he wants (gedanken out the wazoo); it's not discomfort if it doesn't describe reality, full stop. |
It does describe and explain the reality of quantum effects.
Did you happen to read Penrose's book The Road to Reality? It came out in 2004. It is 1100 pages of step by step explaination of his detailed view of reality.
Penrose is 65 years old. He has been knighted. He knows he will be proven correct. This book should dissuade those tempted to suggest he got lucky again. After all, Penrose was right about Black Holes and aperiodic tilings. Why should he be correct in suggesting the obvious implications of deBroglie's equations are correct?
| Quote | | How do you get a ground state in a 325K person? |
A tubulin dimer is 8 nm by 4 nm by 5 nm and weighs 55,000 daltons.
|
