What are some basic topics in quantum physics? Is it all alternate dimensions and things that can't be proven?
-
Alternate dimensions don't have much to do with quantum mechanics. That's more to do with string theory.
Quantum mechanics is not the realm of things that can't be proven. Most of its predictions have been verified, many have a long, solid history of having been verified for almost a century. A few things, like the Higg's boson, have not been proven, but you still shouldn't say they can't be proven. They are working on proving it.
Any scientific theory should be testable, though maybe for some highly theoretical ones they haven't figured out how to test them yet. But quantum physics is quite solid. It's so well established, that it has something called the "Standard Model". Everybody agrees on it, for the most part.
Some basic things are the photoelectric effect, black body radiation (two of the first experiments that could not be explained without quantum effects), Bohr model of the atom (pretty simple - wrong - but on the path to the correct model of the atom), Heisenberg uncertainty principle, Pauli exclusion principle, and the Schroedinger wave equation (difficult). You can also get into particle soup: up quark, down quark, strange quark, charm quark, top quark, bottom quark, leptons - electron, muon, tauon, electron neutrino, muon neutrino, tauon neutrino - W+, W-, Z0 bosons, gluons, photons, Higg's boson, and all their antiparticles.
Quantum mechanics is not the realm of things that can't be proven. Most of its predictions have been verified, many have a long, solid history of having been verified for almost a century. A few things, like the Higg's boson, have not been proven, but you still shouldn't say they can't be proven. They are working on proving it.
Any scientific theory should be testable, though maybe for some highly theoretical ones they haven't figured out how to test them yet. But quantum physics is quite solid. It's so well established, that it has something called the "Standard Model". Everybody agrees on it, for the most part.
Some basic things are the photoelectric effect, black body radiation (two of the first experiments that could not be explained without quantum effects), Bohr model of the atom (pretty simple - wrong - but on the path to the correct model of the atom), Heisenberg uncertainty principle, Pauli exclusion principle, and the Schroedinger wave equation (difficult). You can also get into particle soup: up quark, down quark, strange quark, charm quark, top quark, bottom quark, leptons - electron, muon, tauon, electron neutrino, muon neutrino, tauon neutrino - W+, W-, Z0 bosons, gluons, photons, Higg's boson, and all their antiparticles.
-
Not at all. For example, the photoelectric effect, for which Einstein got his Nobel (he did NOT get it for relativity!).
This effect proved that light for this experiment (shining light on an emitter and recording the resulting current) could ONLY be explained by the quantization of light, i.e. photons, not by electromagnetic wave theory.
Things like the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle have been verified many times and are not hard to understand.
And so on ...
This bit about string theory and multiple dimensions is very new, is goofy, controversial, and by admission of its own proponents can never be verified experimentally. You're not only safe but wise to completely ignore it and still reap a lot of pleasure from a 1 semester course on quantum mechanics which after all has been around now for 100 years, starting with Niels Bohr!
This effect proved that light for this experiment (shining light on an emitter and recording the resulting current) could ONLY be explained by the quantization of light, i.e. photons, not by electromagnetic wave theory.
Things like the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle have been verified many times and are not hard to understand.
And so on ...
This bit about string theory and multiple dimensions is very new, is goofy, controversial, and by admission of its own proponents can never be verified experimentally. You're not only safe but wise to completely ignore it and still reap a lot of pleasure from a 1 semester course on quantum mechanics which after all has been around now for 100 years, starting with Niels Bohr!
-
I believe classical physics are built upon the laws of relevant applications and quantum physics are based on theoretical laws
-
Yes they are, there is no difference how the "laws" were derived its just that the predicted outcomes are more unusual then first expected.