Re: Photons shapeshifting to wave prior to measurement



Jack wrote:

RP,

I'm sorry didn't reply sooner as I'm being busy lately. The 3
questions are given to Schroedinger by Lorentz when Schroedinger
nearly believed that particles don't exist but all just being
some kind of wave phenomenon. Remember when he discovered the
Schrodinger Equation of the wave function. People didn't know
what it represents. It was a mystery what is the relationship
between the electron and the wave function. Then a person
called Born said the wave function is the location of the
electron probabilistically speaking. Since they don't have better
explanations. They accepted even though it has an odd sense
of logic such as electrons just appearing in locations without
deterministic movement between them. So you are saying Born
is wrong and there was another interpretation to the
Schrodinger equations?? People such as Einstein spent lifetime
searching for it. Prove that particles don't exist and they
are just wavelets. How can wavelets explain the photoelectric
effect? Do you claim this?? But since you claim photons are just
some kind of wavelents. Electrons too and other particles since
they have the same behavior in the double slit experiments. Well.
If they are all wavelets. Then matter don't really exist physically
but just superpositions of wavelets? Huh? Is this what you mean??
Elegant hypothesis but need solid proof. This interpretations
thing is very important as it can put the entire foundation
of Quantum mechanics and physics in right footing. You are
not arguing simply on a small part but the root of it. So
spend great time finding and writing the proof. Dude.

Jack


You've misinterpreted my responses a bit. What I actually posited was that particles are inverse square fields, and that they are rigid in 4D spacetime but appear to fluctuate wrt our Galilean 3D plus time perspective. These relativistic fluctuations in the fields of the particles are the waves to which I refer. The fermion is not a wave, though it is perceived to produce waves.

I'll add to this that what is commonly regarded as spacetime is actually just the superposition of all such inverse square fields, that is, space and field are one in the same substance. Einstein derived the same conclusion when he began to think in terms of spacetime curvature as an alternative to gravitational forces.

I agree with his perspective on this because it allows for unmediated interactions. OTOH, he failed to derive an analogous theory for em interactions, which is required in order to provide logical consistency, that is, the conclusion should have been "as an alternative to force". What I mean by this, is that if he required spacetime curvature to explain forces of gravity, then it is likewise required that spacetime curvature explain forces of electromagnetism. He spent 30 years in the attempt to rectify this, but failed. IMHO this was a result of the fact that he regarded mass as something fundamental and distinct from charge. I don't agree with that speculation, but rather I am inclined to regard mass a macroscopic effect of em origins. Einstein was also inclined in this direction, regarding mass as inertial resistance brought on by an increasing electromagnetic PE with increasing velocity.

The double slit experiment for electrons produces interference because wrt the aperture, the screen, and the surroundings, the electron's field is waving. Wrt it the field is rigid, while all the other particle's fields are waving. Em interactions occur between all of these and the electron is forced from its straight line path. The pattern is a result of the surrounding geometry more so than it is of the electrons intrinsic qualities. The proof of this is direct; remove the slits and the pattern disappears. Without incorporating FTL communication you cannot account for the pattern by any other means than that which I just provided.

Richard Perry





.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Surviving Einstein.
    ... >> But it doesn't contradict classical wave theory. ... >either particles or waves. ... electrons (and photons) are electrons and photons. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Photons shapeshifting to wave prior to measurement
    ... >>can take on any continuous value, the particles are quantized. ... Not only photons but also electrons and all particles ... It means the wave shapeshift into the electron. ... > Feynman said the double slit is the only mystery of quantum physics. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Questions about radiation and em waves
    ... electrons as more like waves than particles??? ... particle and wave attributes. ... The term "radiation" when applied to radioactive materials ... includes particles. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Questions about radiation and em waves
    ... electrons as more like waves than particles??? ... particle and wave attributes. ... The term "radiation" when applied to radioactive materials ... includes particles. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Waves and Particles
    ... > Garry wrote: ... > you singled out particles over waves? ... Double-slit experiments have shown that when electrons are passed through ... everything as being in a wave state, ...
    (sci.physics)