Re: String theory, double slit experiment


"RP" <no_mail_no_spam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:bt2dnf7Lp6AsWXPeRVn-pw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


Greysky wrote:

"RP" <no_mail_no_spam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:z5udnQ-d3_6ipnfeRVn-sg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


axolotl wrote:

On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 01:46:57 -0600, RP <no_mail_no_spam@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:



The universe exists in a constant bath of radiation, and there simply
are no closed systems other than the universe itself. It is impossible
to isolate an electron from the effects of other electrons, and photons
are only units of energy, not in motion, just units of energy period.
In photon experiments the probability isn't a matter of "where will the
photon (energy) land," but rather of "where is the surface
sufficiently pumped by the universal bath of radiation, and in phase
with the incident *wave* to cause a transition.


Agreed. I have been thinking along exactly these lines for a while.
Now,
the question is why did none of my teachers or text books ever make
these
fairly obvious observations?

Maybe they aren't that obvious after all, except in hindsight. This is
one of those things that requires something other than rote learning to
appreciate. It requires an ability to visualize many details converging.
I once provided an analogy in the form of the effect of a passing speed
boat, as its wake passes through two openings along a wave barrier near
the shore. Where the waves (having now been split into two fronts)
constructively interfere the number of whitecap counts along those
"bright" bands will be higher. On second thought, the wave explanation
of the double slit experiment should've been obvious, eh? OTOH, it does
require a rejection of photons as independent point particles, or IOW an
acceptance of the classical retarded potentials and superposition
principle that preceded QM and QED.



Or, they are being lazy. The question you asked (the OP) has to do with
the interpretation of the equation of motion for a single quantum
particle. Most texts, even if they don't state it outright, leave it as
an obvious conclusion that a quantum particle interferes with itself.
They don't go further, so leave a lot of confusion. A major clue that the
standard explanation is not right is indicated by how compartmentalized
the text description of the n-slit experiment is in most explanations.
First they describe the results of the experiment where n=1, then they
launch into the meat and potatos standard explanation where n=2. The clue
is how seperate these explanations are from each other. The results for
n=2 can't be reduced to the results for n=1. This is indicative of a lack
of understanding in our present interpretations of QM, and can be
classified as a defect in the theory. Even Feynman, in his classic
Lectures, is guilty of this - he devotes perhaps one paragraph for the
results where n=1, then proceeds to describe n=2 results for many pages.
If he got it wrong, it is any wonder everyone else after him get it
incorrect as well? Yet it is wrong on so fundamental a level
(conceptual), it hobbles QM... Feynman did get this part right when he
stated that this is *the* fundamental problem/example in QM and that
everything else flows from this conclusion.

I go into the proper interpretation of the Single Slit Experiment on my
website, and if you want to see how much more powerful QM becomes after a
proper understanding of this expriment is achieved, read the information
I provide. BTW, you will also be able to FULLY answer your original
question as well. Just how does a quantum particle 'interfere with
itself' to create an interference pattern? Easy stuff...

Greysky

Have you built that FTL transmitter yet? Good luck with that.
Unfortunately I've already fully answered the question, though ironically
I don't particularly recall asking one :)

Richard Perry



It's the questions we don't know we asked that have the most interesting
answers :)

Greysky


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: String theory, double slit experiment
    ... It is impossible to isolate an electron from the effects of other electrons, and photons are only units of energy, not in motion, just units of energy period. ... constructively interfere the number of whitecap counts along those "bright" bands will be higher. ... Most texts, even if they don't state it outright, leave it as an obvious conclusion that a quantum particle interferes with itself. ... A major clue that the standard explanation is not right is indicated by how compartmentalized the text description of the n-slit experiment is in most explanations. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: String theory, double slit experiment
    ... It is impossible to isolate an electron from the effects of other electrons, and photons are only units of energy, not in motion, just units of energy period. ... constructively interfere the number of whitecap counts along those "bright" bands will be higher. ... Most texts, even if they don't state it outright, leave it as an obvious conclusion that a quantum particle interferes with itself. ... A major clue that the standard explanation is not right is indicated by how compartmentalized the text description of the n-slit experiment is in most explanations. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: String theory, double slit experiment
    ... to isolate an electron from the effects of other electrons, and photons ... interpretation of the equation of motion for a single quantum particle. ... explanation is not right is indicated by how compartmentalized the text ... Just how does a quantum particle 'interfere with itself' to create ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: attractive force via particle exchange - how?
    ... Such verbiage does not rise to the level of explanation for the ... > adopting the perspective of Max Born, that the Schroedinger wave, a.k.a. ... >>> through an aether, multitudinous scenarios arise by which that medium ... > more dismiss a particular variant because some other variant failed than ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: attractive force via particle exchange - how?
    ... >>> with itself through the two slits of a Young's experiment. ... Such verbiage does not rise to the level of explanation for the ... adopting the perspective of Max Born, that the Schroedinger wave, a.k.a. ... >> through an aether, multitudinous scenarios arise by which that medium ...
    (sci.physics)