Problem with the two slit experiment, Observing later

yquantum's paper not forgotten..

Good Elf,Lisa,jal,LL,TRoc,THEY(2) et al,

I'm still looking at Relational Interpretation. ( http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/quant-ph/pdf/0602/0602060.pdf )
jal, .. I get the impression you are reading it precisely the wrong way round .. I could be wrong.
I will need to read it many more times..
Is it powerful enough to explain the DSE? (I was warned the DSE can drive you mad )
Best wishes,
C2.

how do numbers relate to each other?

1 to 4 has the relation 1:4

relational = ratios

TROC is already there

GE, TRoc, C2, Duality, YQ, and All,

There seems to be a theoretical waving of hands regarding "entanglement",
or as Einstein called it "Spooky action at a distance".

I know that there are claims that atomic scale "interactions" can occur between
widely separated localized events where, for example, changing the spin state of
1 electron directly and oppositely effects another "sychronized" distant electron.

IMO, this can only happen if their energy fields are in close enough proximity
to directly interact and influence each other, or if they can interact with
EM fields of other nearby atomic structures that are within the boundaries of
the EM field influences.

Any EM field interactions outside of their direct fields of influence would require a
latency time delay. An example of this would be a radio antenna that radiates
EM fields that are coupled into space. Those EM fields will propagate "forever" but
at a weaker field strength per the ISL. Someone on Proxima Centauri is just
now tuning into "The Mary Tyler Moore" show that was broadcast in the '70's. Their
TV antennas didn't instantaneously detect the show when originally broadcast.

Is their any factual evidence that photons can spontaneously
exhibit "entanglement"? To me,
entanglement is a pure direct EM field interaction, nothing more, nothing less.
Electrons moving around atoms, and in an atomic matrix, exhibit this phenomenon
because their EM fields are constantly "entangled" due to their proximity and
atomic character.

IMO, photons cannot exhibit entanglement unless their EM fields are directly
interacting with the EM fields of matter, otherwise we would not be able to
discriminate their individual frequency and wavelength from white light since
they would be entangled and thereby incoherent.

JMHO. Other opinions welcomed.

LL

This post has been edited by Laserlight on Dec 29 2006, 12:18 AM

quoted by Laidback

I just have a simple question for you? Let us just take a common wave used by most -
UHF 9 300–3000 MHz
1 m – 100 mm television broadcasts, mobile phones, wireless LAN, Bluetooth, and Two-Way Radios such as FRS and GMRS Radios. what is it proximity or boundaries?

Now I know you must amplified the singles -- but with the right conditions, say low atmosphere conditions you could hear a radio signal from thousand miles away! Yes?

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/radio/broadcasting/low-power-faq/

Not to trap you - just a question, you told me all is open on this post for such inquires correct?

Duality/Lisa

This post has been edited by Duality on Dec 29 2006, 12:29 AM

LL,

I regard everything as entangled, or just manifestations of one sole thing; move any of its 'components' and you affect the whole system, which to me is an in-progress (atemporal) multidimensional wavefront collapse interaction courtesy of event horizons & singularities.

now back to my straight jacket ....

Hi Lisa,

Hmmm...Laidback...I was wondering who that reference was meant for?

That is a fair question, but you must concede that the waves from multiple
transmission sources, transmittting at the same frequency, do not "entangle" or mix
until they interact in the cavity of a receiving antenna. The signals can propagate
for thousands of miles and maintain their indivuality and the information that they
contain, under the right atmospheric "waveguide" conditions.

Keep in mind that these are radiating sources operating at very low frequencies
with long bandwidths and very high power, when compared to atomic scale EM
fields.

Are you suggesting that atomic scale EM fields are radiating their energy fields at
some extreme range, beyond their local proximity?

If that were the case, the ambient atomic background EM noise would interact with
all matter and there would be atomic level signal "chaos" of conflicting free
radiating EM sources. Basically, a "static" white out of mixed signal overlap.

Since each atom in the atomic chart vibrates at its own discrete
resonant frequency, because of its "structure", its telltale signal can be easily
detected by spectrographic (and other) techiques.

Do you have another analysis or explanation? I'd appreciate your personal
analysis and not another pdf research link to read.


LL

This post has been edited by Laserlight on Dec 29 2006, 02:23 AM

Hi Duality, LL, TRoc et al,

We have several words without proper definition floating about..

Words:- interference, non-linear mixing, standing waves, linear superposition, spooky action, correlation and entanglement. At any point cavities and/or resonances can appear which seem to be a places where any one or more of the first terms can be converted into any other term. Clarification please!

Best wishes,

-C2.

Laserlight, Confused [I did not want to cause confusion on this, and to put everything down that is spinning in my head -- well that could drive you] , u-quark, all,

As I tried to explained above this is some of the research I have read dealing with how involved matter/waves has to to with any experiment, the speed your talking about is about [c] and is not likely to be remedied in the interim.

For the passage from atomic to macroscopic scales the detectors is determined by the frequency of atomic vibrations, and this really was all I wanted you to think about.

Everyone seems to want to look at this DSE from every perspective & if it has any relevance that is up to the group to decide.

The oscillations on the atomic scale that was just a thought, but they are of extremely short duration compared to the macro - radio waves - just an analogy in looking into the micro and is there any effect that has been overlooked.

These phenomena involve a still large collection of rare events each of which occurs only after many vibrational periods, again I do not want to leave any variable out..

There are so many issues dealing with this test because of the technology used, you have a rigorous derivation of statistical mechanics that have led to important mathematical theory which could apply -- but that can come later if you run across it, but have ultimately resisted a completely satisfying resolution and that is why this post is doing well.

There is the possibility of new ideas in this area springing from many different fields - atomic physics, nonlinear dynamics, numerical analysis, materials science, wave propagation, statistical physics. - such as the temperature-accelerated dynamics methods of so many, and combined quantum and classical methods should be included I believe - I wish I could spend more time with you guys on this..

It is hoped that the simplifications afforded by separation of scales, together with the special features of atomistic problems, can in some way lead to new ways of understanding micro dynamics dealing with all frequency's but please remember it could be solvable or beyond our technology and intellect to explain.

Let me see if I can find any experiment that shows interference by the very cavity in which the DSE is tested.

I know I have not made much of this, but it has been a long 18 so let me collect my few brain cells/REST and see if I can find time to do some research. Yquantum, you sure do not ask for much.

Duality/Lisa

C2-

Since you have raised the issue of specific definitions for terms used, you should
be the one to post their meanings.

LL

Lisa,

We have had very lengthy discussions and examples regarding the interaction
of photonic energy and matter as it relates to the act of detection and how
it affects measured results.

Believe me, we are leaving no stone unturned, but so far we have a plowed
field full of upturned stones. The problem is not confined to finding the ultimate
technical explanation for the DSE, it is getting everyone to see things the same
way and reach total agreement that we have a final solution. Like scientists
over the last 150+ years, we have lots of theory and proposed solutions but no definitive final answer, but I think we have collectively accomplished more to
analyze the fine "dynamics" of the experiment than anyone before.

LL

Hi Laserlight, TRoc, Duality, Yquantum, Confused2 et al,

I have read the article on stellar interference and it is not an interference experiment it is "signal mixing" experiment. The optical signals are converted to analog intensities and then these intensity signals are mixed "electronically" as volts perhaps . This is not "interference" from coherent sources though such distant sources will have spatial coherence. Any two synchronized sine waves can be mixed or displayed symultaneously on a screen or on an XY Plotter and this has nothing to do with interference.

This indicates that some sources have no idea what interference is all about. The PM tubes convert the separate signals to electron currents and therefore are not an exercise in interference. The PM tubes convert intensity to a sinewave. You can do this trick because there are standing waves leading to spatial variation in "intensity" not EM phase.

Entanglement is different to the process of simple local interaction.

This is not the case and shows that the subtlety is being glossed over. Photons are not all entangled but they may still be all coherent. Photons can be entangled in a couple of ways... spin and polarization. The difference between entangled photons and ordinary photons is that entangled photons are formed (usually in pairs?) in single non-parametric source events. My explanation is the magnetic field lines are linked at source topologically. Each photon of the pair is capable of being used in the DSE. The entanglement is "global", that is it is totally non-local and relates to the geometry of our entire Universe. Reading one photon's qubit instantly communicates to the second photon from an observer point of view "along the wavefront" where phase velocity can be infinite, the instantaneous state of the first photon's polarization. Now I do not know if the polarization state of both photons were set from the start or is only set when you read one of the photons (I plug for this second case... a "superposition of both states") the result has been shown to be communicated at near infinite speed. Rhis communication is not really "spooky" since this velocity has always been infinite in all classical theory and what remains to be determined is how or why the correlation of polarizations or spins occur... well this is my explanation is that the magnetic field lines are interlinked at source and 'collapese" of one leads to an example of Lenz's Law and "flipping" the result in the other "linked" conjugate photon. This results in the polarization being conjugate to the first photon. The big problem is you are unable to signal using this process since you cannot know beforehand (before the measurement) which way the first photon was originally polarized.
Wikipedia: Lenz's Law

Here is a conundrum for those who believe that interactions are required for information transfer...
Experimental Synchronization of Independent Entangled Photon Sources

Here we can see entanglement of photons without any "interaction" through strong correlation. This proves that something goes on between source and destination even in quantum "events"... I can see no other explanation than Relational Quantum Mechanics cannot be the whole answer since it virtually says that everything important happens in interactions and nothing else matters. What this experiment shows is "waves" are the underlying reality and "interactions" are Wheeler-Feynman Absorber Theory like events. This elevates Aharonov-Bohm Effect and other "spooky" phenomena to a much higher level and more "fundamentally primitive" than particle "interactions".

Cheers

This post has been edited by Good Elf on Dec 29 2006, 08:11 AM

Hi TRoc,

From here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_dynami...slit_experiment

From the Dirac quote

The subtlety of the point escaped me until you pointed it out .. the 'claim' is quite definitely that energy (a photon) is transferred to another part of the system .. the DSE shows photons being 'shifted' by the opening of the second slit.

A while back I did a graphical integration on the result of the single photon DSE ..
( http://www.teachspin.com/instruments/two_s..._combiplot2.gif )
In no particular units
Slit A only 112
Slit B only 106
( Slit A + B 218 )
Both slits open 209
To get the same result within a 5 percent seems reasonable given the likely errors involved (not least in my graphical integration)

While hardly conclusive it confirms my/(our?) expectation that no photons are lost and energy is conserved.

Best wishes,
-C2.

In the light of the paper posted by yquantum about Relational Interpretation..
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/quant-ph/pdf/0602/0602060.pdf
Take a 'normal' nicely set up DSE and replace the screen with a black screen with the letters 'a'.. 'z' written in white ink where the bright bits were. Illuminate the screen with the same frequency you set it up with and look down it the wrong way. Are the letters on top of each other? Can each letter be resolved in any way?
Does this tell us anything .. if so then what?
Best wishes,
C2.

Hi everyone, {to many to name which is great for this post.}

I am doing my best to think out of the traditional fundamental training that I have had and what is said I do not always agree with but I want to open up the door to new ways of thinking for all.

Good Elf, I know how interference and sine waves behave but this has not answered the question that everyone seems to be looking for so I will just toss out the idea not expecting an rational explanation but in hopes of a serendipity moment for someone.

EXAMPLE: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-bohm/#hv
You seem to be thinking in this vein of thought and how would you measure the pilot wave, you cannot and that is what I was getting out. I am doing my best on this but it is out of my way of rationalizing!

Confused2, I deal with the micro and QM on a daily basis and agree that until we come up with a better theory we will have to use the SM, QM, QED, etc., the well defined and data to extreme precision is the tool of the day.

Some enjoyable reading on the subject not deep just a way of thinking.

http://s162044184.onlinehome.us/lib/05jf/pdf/0105-50.pdf

Duality/Lisa

Hi Confused2,

Sorry Confused2, you will need to explain to me... if the slits are left to right are the letters left to right? Do you mean that the screen is a "perfect absorber" and no individual photon flashes can be seen on the black part? What is the "wrong way" to look at this?? Do you mean that certain of the tiny individual flashes of light "illuminate" the white letters allowing us to read them? Letters on top of each other?... I do not understand. Is this a reference to the paper cited?

Cheers