Problem with the two slit experiment, Observing later

Are you happy that it gives every photon a 'clean slate' for the purposes of the DSE?

Best wishes,

-C2.

Hi Confused2,

I am unsure what you are getting at here. The DSE does not give us much to deal with. It is what it is! A simple clean pinhole or slit is usually not entirely sufficient for the best optical effect. It is a trade off (see the Wikipedia reference in my last post). You need to have slits (or pinholes) close together and thin or small for DSE... this limits the use of of "lenses" with diaphragms (spatial filters) which if corrected properly actually provide a better optical condition.

The better way to image any optical system is not to use a lens at all or even a pinhole and use some super-resolution method (of which there are nowadays quite a few). It really comes down to what the problem is that you need to solve and then find the optimum way to do it.

Cheers

TRoc, GE, C2, and All

You might find this interesting:

SPACE CHARGE AND PHOTONS

By Bo Lehnert and Sisir Roy, Reviewed by Hal Fox

http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_6_10_13.html

Space charge:

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

LL

Hi Laserlight,

I am not that keen on the tired light concept. That cropped up some decades ago and I thought was tested and found to be a "no goer". The idea of space charge is always around and was the theory of preference back in the valve era. Obviously this does have merit since the charge can indeed be measured. The question is what more should be said of it??? There must be somethings there that have not been looked into for a very long time. For instance the walls of the valve itself would have formed a cavity and yet I have not heard of anyone speaking of the possibility of "stationary states " within that kind of cavity. Clearly valves are often used (even today) as resonators up to the microwave region. Things often slip bye. Hmmm... thanks for that Laserlight... I will give it some thought.

Cheers

Valves .. ah .. those were the days..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klystron#Two-...tron_oscillator

If you look at the drawings you'll see 'cavities' .. REAL cavities .. this might explain part of my puzzlement when I was recently introduced to invisible cavities .

Many years ago I was sent to repair one of those Klystron type beasts .. in those days electronics had doors and you could walk about inside it . The downside of wandering about inside a microwave cooker is that the last thing you want is for the damn thing to start working. As a point of interest that might save the life/career of someone else .( if these beasts still exist ) .. the heater must have drawn 'undreds of Amps and the contacts at the base of the beast had somehow extracted a non-conductive gunk from the 5th dimension. A good scrape with a Swiss Army knife and all was well . Praise and honours? Nah.. I'd already got to the point of ordering a replacement before I spotted the problem .. the 'C2 curse' .. shame, disgrace .. as then so now.. nothing changes.

-C2.

Hi Confused2, Laserlight, TRoc, Jal, Fivedoughnut, Yquantum et al,

He he he... Interesting story. Getting back to business I have discovered a new way of looking at the Young's DSE. I have not fully read this yet and I am one to view "plasmons" as strictly "resonant" pseudo-particles not essential to QM. Nevertheless this treatment indicates a way to approach the problem from the slit end and not the screen end (who knows this may be right... as far as it goes)...

Taco has an Open University Web page where he has placed many very useful links to "free" information.
Taco Visser's Web Page
This is not to mean that just because it is "free" it is "worthless"... this seems to be the assumption taken by many scientists today... especially those that are inspired only by money (nobody here included... you guys and gals are all inspired by only the "holiest" of ideals eh?). I think there is a quote I can drop here that shows what I mean ...

Wikipedia: Plasmon
"surface plasmons have the unique capacity to confine light to very small dimensions which could enable many new applications."

Cheers

Addendum: This could help as well ... Visser believes in topological charge too...

This post has been edited by Good Elf on Jan 23 2007, 01:59 AM

Hi C2,

I've found that one never gets the praise due. Someone else always wants to
take credit for hard work, initiative, originality, long hours, etc. Those with
prof's or egocentric self serving bosses know what I mean.

It's just a fact of life.....

Best Regards,
LL

Hi Confused2, Laserlight et al,

While we are discussing these "little disappointments" in life it goes almost without saying... No good deed goes unpunished. I know!

Cheers

PS: Refresh your browser on my recent previous post

This post has been edited by Good Elf on Jan 23 2007, 02:04 AM

How do you know. I guess you've been disappointed a lot yourself good elf.
Like buying a good looking car and watching it fall apart. Or crashing it into a bridge the day after it was bought.

Corollary; If you do a good deed you will be taken for granted.

Who's disappointed? What's everybody talking about?

I wrote a patent application recently.
If you are writing a patent, my friends told me to leave out a detail or two.
That way they'll have to pay me consulting fees to figure out why its not working perfectly.

This post has been edited by Neil Farbstein on Jan 23 2007, 02:08 AM

Hi Neil,

Previous comment removed...

Still ... has anyone given my other post some serious consideration?
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...ndpost&p=169312


Cheers

This post has been edited by Good Elf on Jan 23 2007, 02:38 AM

[QUOTE=Good Elf,Jan 23 2007, 02:10 AM] Hi Neil,

"... taken for granted" is that an euphemism for "totally sequestered from sane society"... he he he! If it is not "punishment" it usually "hurts like punishment"... eh? He he he! You have received a lot of "stick" and few "carrots" lately Neil.

Still ... has anyone given my other post some serious consideration?
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...ndpost&p=169312


I'm not sure i know what you are talking about. Have you been totally sequestered from sane society lately? I have had some very good luck lately. I told you the contract I won was the biggest break of my life.

I have not received the stick you
thought I have. What are you talking about? I counted you among my friends.
I would not you expect you to be gloating about my misfortunes. Incidentally,
I was talking about somebody else's misfortunes today. I was not talking about you when I mentioned sky high car repair bills. I feel you owe me an apology good elf. It seems you may have tarred my reputation a bit Elf.

This post has been edited by Neil Farbstein on Jan 23 2007, 02:51 AM

Hi Neil,

Statement deleted...

It is I that "have been totally sequestered from society" for "doing good deeds" and in keeping with the sentiment "no good deed goes unpunished"... if you have never suffered that process then I humbly apologize for any incorrect inference that you have interpreted from that statement and I will remove it instantly...

I will remove the statement immediately... and I have done it. I thought we were friends here...

To clarify... In the past I have used my knowledge in certain circumstances to save others reputations but in the process it certainty angered those higher up in authority that I just did not go "along for the ride" and accept the "due process" handed out to the luckless victim. I was the technical expert in the Laboratory and I disagreed with the summary processes handed out by non-technical and legal people. I then demonstrated to all that it was not the fault of the Officer concerned but that the Instrument, worth nearly 1/2 Million dollars, had a design fault. This was confirmed by independent investigation by an authority in the field. The company finally paid out on the Warranty and the mans reputation was exonerated... and as far as that went it was the end of the story. Can we put a "price" on that? In reality it was not the end of the story and the mans reputation was so badly damaged he had to leave and obtain a position somewhere else and I was "sequestered away in a sub-basement room" without a "permanent" position (my position declared "redundant"), for several years. True story ... and I would have some others as well. Things have improved "marginally" but I would not do things in any other way. This is not something I would normally tell but this is a special case and every word is true.

Now we both understand what prompted my comments. You can gloat over me instead. I value our friendship and I see ... so do you.

This post has been edited by Good Elf on Jan 23 2007, 03:30 AM

Hi GE,

RE: your recent posts on plasmons and surface fields. I would like to continue
along this vein since I have been a proponent of these phenomena as the most
likely candidates for explaining diffraction and localized phase interference at
the slits.

I appreciate the fact that you have posted the papers and are willing to
re-examine the possibilities presented.

There are many interesting papers in the link you referenced that seem to
support various theoretical elements applicable to the DSE.

You know my theories already, and I am looking forward to your interpretation
of the information provide in the papers, as it applies to the DSE.

Perhaps we can collaborate to seek a solution, via developmental discussions.

Regards,
LL

I dont know what prompted that remark Good Elf. I have had my share of troubles but I'm no Sakarov. I'm not sure what you mean by "authoritarian behavior" I have run into 5 times as much red tape as anyone else I know at the Department of Energy. There is going to be a big suit about that. It bothers me that my ongoing run around from the DOE seems to be something you are gloating about. Remove it Elf. I'm insulted.

removed

This post has been edited by Good Elf on Jan 23 2007, 03:41 AM