What is classical wave theory?
437435
the theory that light, and all electromagnetic radiation (radio waves, x-rays, microwaves) travels as a wave, like the ripples on a plucked string. these waves look like sine and cosine graphs.\n\n\nthis was proved to be an incomplete picture by eistein's analysis of the photoelectric effect, for which he won the nobel prize. this showed light was in fact made of particles called photons. however, quantum wave theory now tells us that all matter is both a particle and aa wave; the matter is contained in a particle, but the location of the particle is determined by a wave.
648100
CIH is spot on, but you should also realise from what he said that electromagnetic waves or particles are ways of describing and calculating what a photon will do, they are not the actual photon itself (whatever that is). \n\nSometimes it easy to think that the description of an object IS the object, especially if it fits it well. If it was possible to write an equation or model which fully described a motor vehicle, you still wouldn't be able to drive it to the shops, but you would be able to accurately descibe how it drove there.\n\nIsn't physics wonderful! Philosopy and science all neatly wrapped up in one unifying theory of lots of theories!
577560
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_waves
835118
In optics and physics, a wavefront is a line of points (called a locus) having the same phase. For a wave propagating in 3 dimensions, the locus is a surface.
618120
The how of refraction is that light travels at different speed in different media, and always takes the minimum time of flight path.\n\nFor example, if you consider a plate of glass with a beam of light hitting it at an angle, like so:\n\n   &#92;&#92;&#92;       Air\n--------------\n    |||      Glass\n\nThe light will bend to travel at a sharper angle as it passes into the glass.  Where exactly it lands ends up being the point that has minimum travel time.  If you were to consider a plane inside the glass parallel to the surface of the glass and calculate, based on the speed in air and the speed in glass, the time it would take the light from the specified source to hit various points on this plane, you'd find the point it actually hits is the one that has the shortest time of flight.  This idea for determining the "why" of refraction originated with the mathematician Fermat, who found that the "principle of least action" applied to many things in physics.   This idea is very similar to the idea of geodesics in modern gravitational theories.\n\nThere are various other ways to calculate this, such as classical methods using Huygen's principle which analyzes the main wavefront into many small wavelets, and considers the action at many points as the incident wavefront meets with material of a different propagation velocity.  The net action of the changes on each wavelet creates a change in direction for the entire wavefront.  \n\nAlso, you can use Feynman's method of considering light taking all possible routes, with the observed route being the phase interference sum of all of these possible routes.  The phase interacts to cancel out all things we *don't* see happen, but, from a quantum mechanical point of view, these non-happening paths are still is a sense real, just very improbable.  So, in that case, the change in path is a result of a Huygen's like phase velocity change, and a phase summation over all possibilities which reinforces the "classical" behaviour.
358443
Natural magnetic variations and decay.  It is like waves of variation.
227485
Depends of what you are looking for, "field theory" is a big topic.\n\nFor classical field theory I would recomend:\nClassical Field Theory by Francis E. Low\n\nFor Quantum Field Theory I know people have found these useful:\nIntroduction to Quatum Field Theory by Peskin\nQuantum Field Theory by Brown\nQuantum Field Theory in a Nutshell by Zee
195240
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Modern_Physics:Waves_in_one_Dimension:Problems
482458
Wave-particle duality of light in particular is observed in a number of experiments but only one or the other form.  To show this you will to explain 2 or more phenomena, for matter the photoelectric effect is the best example for waves there are plenty to choose from.\n\nThat however is for light, if you are talking about matter for example electrons as a wave, then you will have to use debrogle equation and explain a experiment like electron diffraction, where is acts as a probablility wave and builds up a diffraction pattern rather that each electron actually being considered as a wave.\n\nHope this helps
896921
Physics. The variation of wave amplitude that occurs when waves of the same or different frequency come together.\nElectronics. \nThe inhibition or prevention of clear reception of broadcast signals.\nThe distorted portion of a received signal.\nThe negative or distorting effect that new learning can have on previous learning or that previous learning can have on new learning\n\nWhen two or more waves interact and combine, they interfere with one another. But interference is not necessarily bad: waves may interfere constructively, resulting in a wave larger than the original waves. Or, they may interfere destructively, combining in such a way that they form a wave smaller than the original ones. Even so, destructive interference may have positive effects: without the application of destructive interference to the muffler on an automobile exhaust system, for instance, noise pollution from cars would be far worse than it is. Other examples of interference, both constructive and destructive, can be found wherever there are waves: in water, in sound, in light.
745636
The main concept to understand is that of a carrier wave.  The radio wave is that.  A radio wave is electro-magnetic radiation, which, unlike other waves, is not a vibration within a medium, like sound waves for example, which are the propagation of alternating high and low pressure within the air, or other fluid media.  Electro-magnetic waves are a self propagating electro-magnetic effect which can travel even in a vacuum.  Electro-magnetic radiation is a pulsing stream of energy where the pulses are at a constant frequency.  What we perceive as different phenomenon are in fact the same electromagnetic radiation but at different frequencies.  Microwaves, Radio, Ultra-violet, Visible Light, and Infra-red, are all electro-magnetic radiation moving down the scale from high to low frequency.\n\nThe radio transmitter sends out radio waves at a specific frequency or band of frequencies.  The aerial of the receiver develops tiny electric currents in it as the radio wave flows past it.  These are pulsing currents at the same frequency as the radio wave, but these pulses are not in themselves the content of speech or music.  This content, or signal, is carried in the wave, hence the concept of the carrier wave.\n\nIt is easier to understand Amplitude Modulation or AM radio so I will restrict myself to that.  If you imagine a radio wave as a very long string with the pulses like beads on it, all spaced at precise intervals, then imagine that the beads slowly getter bigger and smaller along its length.  Each bead is a packet of energy in the wave and all occur at the same frequency, but where the beads get bigger there is more energy in the packet.  It only takes a little more imagination now to see how the pattern of a sound wave can be represented by the bulging out of the beads, and their getting smaller.  This is called the amplitude.\n\nLooking at it in practical terms, at the transmitter end sound is converted in the microphone into a corresponding pattern of changes in the current flowing through the microphone.  That is your signal.  That signal which is at a low electrical power, is used to create the same pattern but in a circuit of much higher electrical power - that is what an amplifier does.  The device used to transfer the pattern is called a transistor, which uses the low powered circuit to control the flow in the high powered circuit.\n\nThe amplified signal is fed to the transmitter aerial, so now that pattern of electrical energy, identical to the pattern of the sound picked up by the microphone, comes out of the aerial as radio waves, with the pattern held in the varying amplitude of the radio wave.\n\nNow comes a trick to follow.  If there are thousands of transmitters all radiating radio waves all over the place, how come your radio only picks up the one signal.  This is where the tuner comes in.  The principle of radio tuning depends on the opposite properties of coils and capacitors.  I don't know if you know what these are, but it doesn't matter if you don't.  Both of these devices have a special kind of resistance to electricity known as impedance.  Impedance only operates where the current is varying.  The voltages and currents in our radio Ariel will be varying at exactly the same frequency as each radio wave it is exposed to, so if we pass that current through either a coil or a capacitor there will be an impedance in the circuit.  Now the impedance of the coil increases as the frequency gets higher and the impedance of the capacitor gets higher as the frequency gets lower.  An AM tuning circuit simply passes the signal current through both a coil and a capacitor at the same time, and the capacitor is a mechanically variable one, so by turning a knob you can increase or decrease the capacitance.  The trick here is that as the capacitance changes the circuit will show least impedance to a specific frequency compared with all the others, so provided the frequencies are not too close, as the law requ
529612
It was first proposed by the Ancient Greeks, then expounded upon by Newton, then again by Einstein, and most recently by our friend Hawking.\n\nHere is what Einstein proposed:\n\nEinstein proposed that light was not a continuous wave, but consisted of localized particles. As Einstein wrote in the introduction to a March, 1905 paper, "According to the assumption to be contemplated here, when a light ray is spreading from a point, the energy is not distributed continuously over ever-increasing spaces, but consists of a finite number of energy quanta that are localized in points in space, move without dividing, and can be absorbed or generated only as a whole."\n\nHope that helps.
241831
Light can be both a particle and a wave.
72824
Wave length is often represented by the Greek lower case letter lambda (your stick figure).  Replace that in your equation with "wavelength" or W until it makes sense then substitute lambda back into the equation.  It is just a shorthand notation that scientists have agreed upon (and nothing very magic).  See the link for more.  Good luck.
129199
All light waves dissipate through space in a wave function pattern.  When they interact with obstacles, these wave patterns can cause interference patterns like waves of water.
258518
Your analogy doesn't represent the problem at all.  \n\nWhen we say a particle is treated as a wave it refers to the particle actually not existing at any particular point.  It actually exists at all of points in some region with a certain probability (it is everywhere at once).
283261
A BEAM of particles behaves like a wave\nas you know. The wavelength is h/mv.  (De Broglie)\nInteresting is your question: do moving partikels create a wave? I cannot say yes or no. I will think about it very carefully. fd_r@yahoo.com\n\nAdded later. You suggest space/time is waving.\nTo me space and time are nothing physically. It is only fantasy in man’s brain and it works usefully.\nEinstein is talking about curved space. I cannot imagine that. I can only understand curved matter like a rubber ball and a standing wave in a string of a guitar. I cannot grab space and bend it.\nIn the same way I cannot visualise the concept of an oscillation of space, so an oscillation of nothing.\nMore acceptable for me is an electromagnetic wave as a cluster of oscillations of the electric and magnetic field.\nI do not reject your concept of waving space/time. I only cannot imagine. Maybe I am too simply minded. Maybe with waving space/time there is a field, not electromagnetic, because a beam of neutrons shows wave behaviour as well. What kind of field? Gravitational? I do not know.