Problem with the two slit experiment, Observing later

Hi Lisa,

I'm not getting your point. The beams are interacting with a vapor and the
energy of the harmonics of the electrons in the vapor are what are being detected.

What are you attempting to point out? How does this pertain to the DSE or
TRoc's proposal?

Please elaborate.



TIA,
LL

Duality,


I'm not sure if you are referring to C2 & Jal's dislike of the plane-wave, but yes, your point is correct. I'm also NOT sure if everyone is ready to ACCEPT
"interference" on broad terms, but your source is good.

It is also true (as also per Fresnel/Huygens) that less than monochromatic light will effectively be a plane wave as well. All the wavelets will combine at some distant radius.

From your source (thanks for the link!):

(emphasis added)

And,

THIS is what we are talking about now.

Another new definition of energy:

and what happens to it?

So, this "new energy" term, flux, falls to zero in the dark bands. But not the REAL energy, I say. The real energy term is conserved.

I would love to hear the story of how "1-at-a-time photons" were produced in 1909. It is much safer, and correct, to say, that our DEFINITION of "1-at-a-time" was established, and not changed, since 1909. The same for the definition of "monochromatic" light source. Am I splitting hairs? DAMN RIGHT! This is Sub-Atomic Physics, there is NO room for "generalizations" in the study of Fundamentals.

The overview says it best:

ciao,

T.Roc

Love this Good Reading!
As an aside yquantum
Gerard 't Hooft is my favourite communicator. I've reccomended his page to the "math kids".
http://www.phys.uu.nl/~thooft/theorist.html
HOW to BECOME a GOOD THEORETICAL PHYSICIST
by Gerard 't Hooft

http://www.phys.uu.nl/~thooft/lectures/basisqft.pdf
THE CONCEPTUAL BASIS OF QUANTUM FIELD THEORY
Gerard ’t Hooft
jal

TRoc, Lisa, and All,

HHHHhhmmmm.....IMO, all of the signal mixing, phase timing, recombination,
harmonics, constructive and destructive interference all happens in the vicinity of the slit cavities.

Do you agree/disagree?

The pdf that Lisa referenced stated that the interference occurred
at the screen. I totally disagree. The interaction of light with the cavities of the
slits is the reaction zone where EM energy fields "react". There is a phase delay caused by
the slit cavities, and upon mixing/recombining, the momentum of the mixed
"signal" changes the exiting photon trajectories.

The resultant mixing interference at the slit cavities generates a light pattern that is
projected onto the screen. This can be verified by just moving the screen
forward and backwards from the slits. The resultant mixed signal, emanating
from the slits, acts exactly like a movie projected on a screen moving back and
forth. The image expands and contracts with distance....by virtue of the ISL.

All harmonic or phase recombination occurs where the geometry of the slit cavities
changes the phase timing relationships of the incident photon waveforms. The
instantaneous phase angle of the photons determines how they react in the
cavities. There is no further mixing or wave interference past the mixing area of the slits. The
waves just spread out and overlap from the mixing point and get projected onto
the screen. How far the projection "spreads" is a function of distance from the
slits.

Comments, discussion, disagreements welcome.

LL

This post has been edited by Laserlight on Dec 19 2006, 05:36 AM

Hi all,



LL,

I have probably not given the perfect explanation. The very important part, at the end in bold:

For the time being, I've dropped even the simple harmonic ratio description, in order to just try to describe and explain the Light & Dark bands with the "color polarity" of the octave of visible light. The same pattern, that I can explain with Resonance, exists for EVERY octave of "oscillations".


The picture of the prism that you linked is DOCTORED, as so many things in modern Science are. The "rainbow", as defined by Newton, DOES NOT exist "from some center point" inside the prism, and extend cleanly (together) to the wall.

Here is a REAL picture of a prism bending light. Look at the outside edges of the prism, where the colors start from (not the center). Then look at the pairs (red/yellow, cyan/violet) first exist independently (no green, no continuous spectrum), and THEN come together.




Now, for the standard, "R-B-G" color theory, as shown in the color wheels that you linked.

Problem #1. RBG can NOT produce Violet. (period) This would require FREE energy, as violet frequencies have MORE energy than any of RBG.

Problem #2. "Magenta" (violet+red) DOES NOT exist in the electro-magnetic, visible light spectrum. The model (used by Physics) doesn't allow it. There is NO KNOWN frequency for this color. DO NOT let them tell you that this is because magenta is secondary (or even tertiary), because a frequency for EVERY OTHER COLOR can be derived. (including the closely related brown and pink)

Problem #3. White and Black are not so easily produced as this model suggests.

Notice that I am NOT saying this is all wrong, just incomplete, or misleading.


Jal's link to G.'t Hooft's "HOW to BECOME a GOOD THEORETICAL PHYSICIST" is great. He talks about the need for TESTING of one's ideas, by allowing your peers to check it over. GE, C2, and a few others helped me do just that last year here, and sent me back to make some improvements.

There are 2 ways to forward your theory: experiment yourself, or research experiments that others have already done, that prove your idea. I have taken the latter approach, and found great success in the past year of research.

I found that I was (not surprisingly) not the first person to "check" Newtons' conclusions by buying a few prisms, as well as his book, "Optics". I immediately found several phenomenon that he did not include. I made full reports of as many different ways to produce color as possible.

Digging all this back out, I have found some documentation on the internet, that supports these experiments. The "big" name that comes out is Goethe, who criticized Newton's limited approach from early on. This is a great example of the "bureaucracy/political" nature of Science. Most historians (and color experts) say that CLEARLY, Goethe's model for color is better than Newtons'. However, Newton was SO popular at the time, for his calculus, theory of gravity, laws of motion, etc., that his "color theory" was accepted anyway.

The truth has been undermined ever since.

More references:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Colours

I was going to try to take digital photos, and link them here, but I found some great photos, fully describing what I am saying here:

http://www.scielo.br/img/revistas/ea/v7n19/encarte19.pdf

Please note, Goethe's' theory is incomplete, and does not have much more to do with my theory than this. There is some truth to the "polarity" however. When splitting up a photon, you can look at it as the same as cutting a magnet in half. You DO NOT find a "monopole"; you get TWO new magnets.


So, what I am saying here, LL, is NOT mixing at all (as far as what I have been saying). Just the fact that if you look at the pattern on the screen (in the DSE) through a prism, you will see a familiar pattern. That is, IF you have done some further experiments than Newton did, and the MEDIA recorded in "History". You need to understand what ALWAYS happens to these "pairs" of colors (r/y, c/v), in regards to LIGHT and DARK. It is elementary, and Fundamental.

It can also be stated as a recursive set of frequency ratios. Red = 1, Yellow = 1.25 ; Cyan = 1.5, Violet = 1.75 (approximate integer ratios), but I'd like to leave that aside, for now.

The light through a LARGE slit, cast onto a screen, or wall, makes the general pattern of "a DARK background, with a LIGHT "oval" spot. Decreasing the slit size brings the DARK edges CLOSER together, which CAUSES green to appear. You can "watch this happen" before your eyes.

Doing the INVERSE, you get "a LIGHT background, with a DARK oval spot. Decreasing the size of the slit brings the LIGHT edges closer together, which CAUSES magenta to appear. You can watch this happen, as you decrease the slit size. No hocus-pocus here, no doctored photos, no "theories". Plain old Scientific observation of a phenomenon.

These simple observations, written in the form of "rules", explains EVERY outcome of the SSE, DSE, and QM-spooky-interpretations-SE. No tricks necessary.


regards,

T.Roc



This post has been edited by TRoc on Dec 19 2006, 05:55 AM

TRoc,

Something isn't right about your color analysis of prisms....



Java Prism

Refractive prism tutorial

Prisms


The DSE is not that simple. A single photon DSE experiment can only be
affected by a phase interaction with the cavities of the slits. A laser beam is monochromatic, multi-color
interactions cannot be a factor. Again, phasing relationships makes the
most sense per my prior "models".

Comments, discussion welcome.

LL

This post has been edited by Laserlight on Dec 19 2006, 07:55 AM

Hi all,



I wanted to include a quote from Jal's last link (http://www.phys.uu.nl/~thooft/lectures/basisqft.pdf)

I talked a little while ago about the "double quantization" that QM takes, and that it leads to infinite degrees of freedom, and infinite modes. The above quote gives another reason for the "octave" approach of single quantization, relevant to LL's last question about IR and UV.

You can see that QM "tunes the bare parameters carefully, to match observations", and that the space-time lattice "mesh size" is critical to the "tuning" process.

You may recall that I "tuned" my Resonance Matrix just one time (to adjust for the constant velocity of c), and then the "mesh size", which is quasi-exponential, creates an expanding space-time lattice. From this "tuning", all SM particles, Isotopes, and the visible spectrum are "accurately approximated", without any "adjustments".


Someone can help me remember, was it Paschen who "discovered" infra-red (in the H spectrum) by holding a thermometer to the "outside" of red light? I don't have it in front of me right now.

If IR and UV are separated by exactly an octave (f x 2), we would "see" the superposition of them as dark, yet have ~same amount of energy as the middle of the two, without the generation of heat. This mid-point is at the frequency of green light, yet it is NOT green light. The difference, I am suggesting, is in "counter-propagation". Green light is incoming, in terms of energy, and magenta is outgoing energy. This would allow the conservation, or balance of energy in the screen itself to occur.

This energy balance has not been missed by the plant world. Hold a clear container of chlorophyll up to (looking at) the light, and it is green. Turn around, so that the light is behind you, and (you guessed it) it appears "magenta-ish" .

Some of you may recall my link to the NASA video, where they did color experimenting, in the thin-film realm that gravity does not allow. The result of a mix of "several" primary colors, ended up green! This made the astronaut nervously (jokingly?) proclaim the discovery of "the color of the Universe". HO-HOLD on there Buck Rogers, did you get a camera angle from the "other frame of reference"? (they didn't) Too bad, because I still think it would have appeared magenta.

Anyone with the "standard" green glass shaded desk lamp can see magenta shadows cast by this light. These "colored shadows" are also NOT covered by Newton, yet seen and written about by others since then.


This is just a "sidetrack" for anyone interested. I'd like to hear comments on the Light/Dark bands, and how they follow the same pattern as "colors" from different perspectives through a prism.

This is very "chicken/egg" like. Does "darkness" and "lightness" come from specific superpositions of frequencies (colors), or does color come from the "infinite" gradation's of light and dark? (and translated by our eyes & brain)

Has anyone seen where two black and white photographs of the same scene, one with "far field" filters, and the other with "near field" filters, can be combined (overhead projector?) and a get FULL spectrum color picture? No tricks.


ciao,

T.Roc

LL,

I feel your pain, LL.


The problem is, all those links you gave are RENDITIONS of the phenomenon.

The links that I gave are PHOTOS of the real McCoy.

The prism IN MY HAND says something different than "someone's" theory, and neat animation. Which would you believe?


I think that EVERY student of Physics should own a prism, and a stringed instrument. 1 basic prism, cost: $4 ; 1 (used) guitar, cost: $60 ; First hand understanding of directly perceived phenomena : PRICELESS




ciao,

T.Roc


PS. For the SSE/DSE (again) FORGET the colors. Replace them with harmonic ratios of the Fundamental frequency, and THINK about "mirror symmetry" and "duality". What gets "clipped" by 1 side of the slit is the OPPOSITE of the other side. The "middle third" goes right through, the "side lobes" are "mixed" as you said. This is JUST the inverse of "division of the wave front" method. (w/ frequencies) Go back to Jal's link, where we discussed the "3 shades of red" (that were "painted" so nicely), and the exit angles this SLIGHTLY non-monochromatic wave exhibits.



This post has been edited by TRoc on Dec 19 2006, 09:28 AM

Hi TRoc,

Are you saying there is no color "green"? What about green lasers?

http://www.greatreality.com/PrimaryFrame.htm
http://www.greatreality.com/Color2Color.htm
http://www.aip.org/pt/vol-55/iss-7/p43.html

Could you elaborate a little on this this is not just the stuff in the links above is it?

Cheers

This post has been edited by Good Elf on Dec 19 2006, 03:22 PM

Hi All,


LL,

Looking at ..
http://schools.matter.org.uk/Content/Inter...ce/formula.html
the assumption about small angles ceased to be valid as the detector/screen gets closer to the slits .. this suggests the result is more than just a simple projection of something that has already happened.

--------------------

Looking at ..
http://www.teachspin.com/instruments/two_s..._combiplot2.gif
it looks like photons aren't counted in the dark bits .. it seems the little swines that should have been there have hopped over into the bright bits... probably not a popular move, but there it is.

Best wishes,

-C2.

Good Day EVERYONE!
TRoc
We are going to have to follow you with the use of some common references and background information.
Here is some.... but pick the ones that you want.
http://acept.asu.edu/PiN/rdg/color/color.shtml
http://acept.asu.edu/PiN/rdg/color/composition.shtml

spectrum
The result of breaking up light into its various wavelengths. In the visual regime, we see this as a display of the 'rainbow' of colors. A prism is a good tool to use to see the spectrum of colors
spectrometer
An instrument which disperses white light and allows the user to distinguish and measure the wavelength or energy of the resulting colored light.
interference
The result of waves impinging on one another. Constructive interference occurs when the waves are nearly in phase, or when their 'peaks' combine; destructive interference occurs when the waves are nearly 90° out of phase, or when the 'peaks' cancel out the 'troughs' of the waves.
• Calibrate your spectrometer.
a) Use a ruler to draw a wavelength scale along the bottom right-hand side of the back of your spectrometer box (see diagram above). Make sure the spacings are equal.
Look at a fluorescent bulb (in the ceilings of most office/academic buildings) with your spectrometer. A line spectrum should appear on the right-hand side as you look through the grating: a bright green line superimposed on a fainter continuous spectrum. This bright green line is a mercury line at 546 nm. Mark this point on your wavelength scale, and label the rest of your scale, with the longer wavelengths (lower energy -- red) on the right side and shorter wavelengths (higher energy -- blue) on the left side. The bluest line you will see (indigo) is at a wavelength of about 400 nm, and the reddest line you will see (red) is at a wavelength of about 700 nm.

With your approach.... I assume that we will be putting another scale beside the ones in the picture.
Will we need the following picture to be able to follow your approach?
Jal

TRoc and Jal,

ALL of the scientific reference literature shows green as a fundamental
color from prisms.



http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase.../specol.html#c1

Diffraction grating

Ever see a rainbow? I guarantee that there is green in it.

Rainbow Hyperpysics

Rainbow Wikipedia

Atomic Spectral Analysis
Spectral Analysis





LL

This post has been edited by Laserlight on Dec 19 2006, 05:46 PM

Hi!
From http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase...meascon.html#c1
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase.../colspa.html#c1
We have 3 systems …The Munsell, Ostwald and The CIE system.
From my understanding TRoc is proposing a more basic approach. Another scale?
There is also temp involved in the colors (Blackbody Curve).
jal


This post has been edited by jal on Dec 19 2006, 06:20 PM

Hi C2-

Not at all. There is a reaction "mixing zone" just at the exit of the slit cavities.
The results of that mixing spreads and overlaps from that location.

Play with the distance cursor.
Interference DSE Applet

What is your analysis after playing with the applet? The math is still valid.



LL

This post has been edited by Laserlight on Dec 19 2006, 06:24 PM

Jal,

I can assure you that RGB color mixing is used on color CRT TV's to generate
colors. Same with a CRT color monitor. Rear projection TV's use 3 color
tubes R, G, B to project and mix all colors on the screen.

LL