Difference between revisions of "Talk:2817: Electron Holes"
(Positrons) |
(foreshadowing) |
||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Is it worth mentioning that "pewpewpew" was one of the incorrect pronunciations of Perseids in [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2814:_Perseids_Pronunciation 2414]? [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 05:34, 19 August 2023 (UTC) | Is it worth mentioning that "pewpewpew" was one of the incorrect pronunciations of Perseids in [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2814:_Perseids_Pronunciation 2414]? [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 05:34, 19 August 2023 (UTC) | ||
+ | : Foreshadowing! Note it there? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.86.182|162.158.86.182]] 08:11, 19 August 2023 (UTC) | ||
Objection, Your Honor! Don't know if electron quasibeams (see comment above) can be done, but the "a beam consisting of a lack of something is not possible" in the current explanation is too wide. Think of antisound devices! I think a "vacuum beam" going through normal gas pressure is very possible. And what about the Meissner effect, which could be seen as a beam of absence of a magnetic field? [[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.211|198.41.242.211]] 07:25, 19 August 2023 (UTC) | Objection, Your Honor! Don't know if electron quasibeams (see comment above) can be done, but the "a beam consisting of a lack of something is not possible" in the current explanation is too wide. Think of antisound devices! I think a "vacuum beam" going through normal gas pressure is very possible. And what about the Meissner effect, which could be seen as a beam of absence of a magnetic field? [[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.211|198.41.242.211]] 07:25, 19 August 2023 (UTC) | ||
When the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positron positron] was first predicted it was modeled as an electron hole, a gap in the hypothetical "sea" of negative-energy electrons filling all space. Sadly, AFAIK modern quantum field theory has done away with that idea, so while a gun that shoots a positron beam is theoretically possible, it probably wouldn't qualify as an electron hole beam. [[User:Hmj|Hmj]] ([[User talk:Hmj|talk]]) 08:03, 19 August 2023 (UTC) | When the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positron positron] was first predicted it was modeled as an electron hole, a gap in the hypothetical "sea" of negative-energy electrons filling all space. Sadly, AFAIK modern quantum field theory has done away with that idea, so while a gun that shoots a positron beam is theoretically possible, it probably wouldn't qualify as an electron hole beam. [[User:Hmj|Hmj]] ([[User talk:Hmj|talk]]) 08:03, 19 August 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 08:11, 19 August 2023
I must admit... I'm not entirely convinced that one _couldn't_ build an electron hole beam. It would probably be called a quasibeam, but I think it could be done. 162.158.175.61 05:11, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Would an electron "vacuum" be an electron hole gun? Barmar (talk) 05:30, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Is it worth mentioning that "pewpewpew" was one of the incorrect pronunciations of Perseids in 2414? Barmar (talk) 05:34, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
- Foreshadowing! Note it there? 162.158.86.182 08:11, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Objection, Your Honor! Don't know if electron quasibeams (see comment above) can be done, but the "a beam consisting of a lack of something is not possible" in the current explanation is too wide. Think of antisound devices! I think a "vacuum beam" going through normal gas pressure is very possible. And what about the Meissner effect, which could be seen as a beam of absence of a magnetic field? 198.41.242.211 07:25, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
When the positron was first predicted it was modeled as an electron hole, a gap in the hypothetical "sea" of negative-energy electrons filling all space. Sadly, AFAIK modern quantum field theory has done away with that idea, so while a gun that shoots a positron beam is theoretically possible, it probably wouldn't qualify as an electron hole beam. Hmj (talk) 08:03, 19 August 2023 (UTC)