Problem with the two slit experiment, Observing later

Jal,

Does translational symmetry apply to asymmetrical propagating EM fields, or is it
constrained to "physical" matter based systems? We are talking about energy
displacement and regenerative propagation when dealing with light.

What point were you trying to make by introducing translational symmetry?

Regards,
LL

Here's a lotta free software packages available. Personally I can recommend the free Caligari trueSpace, which is very comfortable (at least for me) and it even supports some physical simulations. After all, some of my animations were done by using of this tool, too. For fast download you can consider the free Anim8or, which is very compact, too.



This post has been edited by Zephir on Feb 3 2007, 05:15 PM

It is just another way of saying moving from A---->B
The photon does not folow that rule. According to double slit, its everywhere.
jal

This is not quite exact interpretation of situation by AWT, simply because it's virtually impossible at the case of more massive particles. Whole the economic is based on the fact, youre money are in your pocket, not in the pockets of all the neighboring people at the same time. After all, the double slit phenomena was observed even for oil droplets at the water surface, and the oil droplet cannot behave by such way. So we can expect some quantization limit of such rule, even at quantum scale.



The AWT interpretation of the double slit is, the (photon) particle remains localized, but the deformation (undulation) of the field, invoked by the particle motion not. If the duck swims at the river surface, the duck remains pretty local, whereas the waves spreading around it are spreading across the whole river surface and as such they can interfere with the double slit at the distance, a long time before the duck reaches the slit.

The trick is, the wave interference is making the water slightly more dense at the place of interference patterns. Because duck moves along the water surface like the standing wave packet, it should prefer the more dense path for subsequent spreading, being focused into it, in fact.

This post has been edited by Zephir on Feb 4 2007, 02:11 PM

Hi Laserlight, Confused2, Jal, Zephir, Montec, "THEY", Aerohead, TRoc, stannrodd, Fivedoughnut, Yquantum, Neil Farbstein et al,

Jal... those links to Rabi Oscillations and the Java Applets are excellent, I am still absorbing some of that data. As you say there are some limitations due to the particle treatment (I think that is what you are trying to say?). The assumption in all of these treatments is it is a projective space of reals when we know that Fourier Spaces and Holographic Domains are not truly projective spaces but Complex Spaces. Still, they do have that projective "particle" form... do you agree? My disagreement is only with the interpretation that the particle is the only form that is meaningful as that projection rather than an unprojected form. It is a very complex field and the real nature of this spin is still "hidden" from at least my understanding of the theory. I truly prefer to deal only with the "optics"... I think this is because of the subtlety involved leads me to "difficulties in interpretation". This does not mean a wave description of particles is "wrong" just that very little has been done to clarify some of the more "difficult" treatments of this theory ( a lack of motivation for classical interpretations I suppose or perhaps "stuff" has slipped bye me in published Journal Articles that are not freely accessible on-line). This is not to say that others with a greater grasp may not already understand the classical implications of the theory.

My view of these issues

Zephir... I read that article you referred to earlier on that null experiment of Transverse Doppler ...
The Aether foam concept predict the violation of Lorentz symmetry for long wavelength, which was confirmed experimentally both by "Recent experiments"...
...and I do not see your point. I also cannot understand the specific point that the author is trying to make and it seems like he is more intent on trying to show Einstein is in some way wrong. Clearly this experiment will not show any transverse Doppler simply because there is no such thing for this rotating geometry. A desire by the author to demonstrate motion relative to the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation seems misguided to say the least.

Think of this... a "wheel" 47476 Km in radius rotates in just under a second (300,000 Km/sec ≈ C ). The rim is traveling at "almost" the speed of light tangentially. An observer is sitting in the "hub" of this wheel with a "powerful" laser pointer. He aims it at a mark on the rim. He notices that he is rotating once a second and "feels a little giddy". The laser pointer needs to be pointed quite in advance of the mark on the rim. The spot appears "far behind" where he is pointing but relative to him the rim is totally stationary and the distance between him and that spot is "constant" and it looks like it is just under 47476 Km away. Aside from the unusual curvature in the beam which he does not normally see unless something diffusing in between them... all seems well. There is no apparent reason for the observer to believe there is any Doppler shift due to any apparent movement at all between himself and the "fixed point" on the rim.

Alternatively a "high speed" object traveling just under 300000 Km/sec speeds bye on a tangential path (at a distance of 47476 Km away at closest approach). The particle is Doppler shifted as it passes (Why?). This is because even though the two particles (one on the rim and the one flashing at high speed bye) both are traveling at nearly C it is only the second one's light emissions that suffers transverse Doppler. This is because due to optical aberration the direction of the observer is extremely "aft" and thus for all intents an purposes this light is coming from "behind" the moving source. So regardless if the object is approaching or receding it is red shifted.

Two different treatments leading to different optical phenomena depending on the kind of frame of reference we are using a rotating one or a "Cartesian one". With an "awful pun" this is the "long and the short of it".

Your "duck" (photon) analogy is 1/2 right and 1/2 wrong (previous post). The "quantum duck" is locally at the center of those disturbances and the waves do spread while the "duck" stays still. Later there is a single distant point that the wave function of the "original duck" disappears and reappears at that distant point (waves all simultaneously collapse). It is a complete "duck". The original "duck" is now gone. Did the "duck" travel to the other point or not?? Maybe not. For the "duck" no time has passed and it does not recollect any "duck travel" does it?
http://www.rochester.edu/news/photos/backward_light.mpg
Light's Most Exotic Trick Yet: So Fast it Goes ... Backwards? It also travels "faster than light" too. You must allow for the "advanced and retarded" waves to "catch up" eh!

"Wipe on... wipe off... wipe on ... wipe off"
The Karate Kid.

Cheers

This post has been edited by Good Elf on Feb 4 2007, 03:49 PM

GE or anyone,

Is there any commentary on my prior post(s)?

http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?act=ST&...ndpost&p=173102

http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?act=ST&...ndpost&p=173116

LL

Good Day Everyone!
Any comment on

OR

DO YOU WANT THE FOLLOWING?

Since the photon is everywhere.
Since it knows where it came from.
Since it knows where its going.
Since it knows that you are going to come back tomorrow to look where it went.
It is more intelligent than you.
It can see the past, it can see the future.
It can do things that you cannot.
It’s a “GOD PARTICLE”.
Let’s do as our forefathers …. Get down on your knees and worship it.

jal

Geese.... Jal,

A bit melodramatic don't you think?

FWIW, a photon is inanimate.....read that as no consciousness. It is a human's
interpretation that a photon knows where it has been and where it is going. It
is the height of absurdity to assume any such "fiction" and to try to assign
purposeful intent on the part of a purely natural phenomenon. The idea that
the gods are responsible for any natural events that can't be explained is like
believing in mythology.

A photon is an energy impulse radiating away from some causal event. Many
photon wavelets (individual energy releases from excited atoms in a "matrix")
that happen simultaneously, form a synchronous energy wave pulse that
radiates uniformly in all directions from the source of the excitation.

Let's try to leave the mysticism out of the discussion, lest we regress back to the
"religious" beliefs of the ancient Greeks.

Are we really so enlightened? (pun intended)

LL

This post has been edited by Laserlight on Feb 4 2007, 05:26 PM

That is incredible good elf.

Good Day!

nooooo! .... we can calculate or get on our knees
I have a lot of links in my thread to help you calculate.
You can find your own links to get on your knees. They are everywhere.
jal

Hello All,

A comment on a another board seems quite relevant to some of our prior
discussion about what a photon is.

Kaneda said:

This gets back to the idea that a wave is a radiating energy pulse that temporarily
displaces the potential energy of the medium that it is propagating in. The energy
contained in the propagating wave converts the steady state of the medium from its
normal potential energy state, into a temporary kinetic energy state. The degree of
energy displacement and wave frequency in the affected medium are measures of wave
intensity, power, and duration..

It is important to understand just what a wave is, its morphology (structure), and how energy is "transported" (propagated) progressively from one location to another.

Any wave can be related to every other waveform, they have similar characteristics and obey similar natural "rules". Waves are fundamental mechanisms for transporting pure
energy forces that have been physically “coupled” to some energy system that
acts as a conveyance “medium” for energy transportation.

If you explore the physical composition of any wave several similar attributes become
obvious.

A wave:

1. Is a temporary “impulse” event, with a finite time duration that travels along an
expanding energy wave front that is “confined” by the medium in which it travels.

2. Has an amplitude that corresponds to the quantity of energy being transported.

3. Has a propagation “frequency” that is determined by the expansion and relaxation characteristics of the medium being displaced.

4. Radiates uniformly thru the energy medium which is “transporting” the wave energy.

5. Changes its wave shape, speed, and propagation characteristics to match the physical characteristics of the energy medium in which it is traveling.

6. A wave has:
a.) a leading “energy accumulation” phase, as the medium “aligns” to
conduct/transport the arriving energy pulse. This can be considered a leading edge
bow wave that precedes the actual wave energy impulse.

b.) a rising, and increasing leading edge “amplification” phase that is conveying
the main “bulk” momentum of the advancing energy displacement. The wave
energy rises exponentially over some limited time period and eventually reaches a
peak level as it propagates past a physical fixed location in the medium which is
being displaced.

c.) an exponentially declining subsidence phase as the propagating peak energy level
passes beyond a fixed reference point in the transporting medium. The physical
vertical and horizontal displacement of the medium, caused by the pulse, releases
the kinetic energy component that has been induced into it, back into the passing
pulse.
After the pulse has passed the medium contracts releasing the kinetic energy
induced into it by the pulse. This releasing energy helps to push the wave along and
assists in the forward propagation of the wave as the medium tries to reestablish its
normal steady state energy equilibrium level.

d.) a relaxation ringing phase or a “bounce” caused by contraction “overshoot”
or hysteresis of the medium that is trying to reestablish energy equilibrium.

7. The energy contained in a propagating wave is concentrated and contained within the
energy “confines” of the medium in which it is traveling, but there can be some
external energy coupling/losses that occur along surface boundaries or interfaces to
other media in proximity to or in direct contact with the primary conducting medium.

8. Wave energy always propagates within and along interface boundaries and the energy
of the wave can be channeled, absorbed, confined, reflected, or refracted from
interface boundaries that exist between different types of media.

9. A wave's energy can be divided up to the limits of its ability to regeneratively
transport itself in the medium it is propagating in.

Now we need to apply these concepts to propagating EM waves/light.

Other comments, discussion, disagreements, arguments welcomed.

LL

This post has been edited by Laserlight on Feb 4 2007, 10:34 PM

Hi!
Good!
We are going to find some way to do some calculations.
Here is a good review of sound waves.
http://www.isvr.soton.ac.uk/SPCG/Tutorial/...ial/StartCD.htm

Now!!!!
There is a medium!

Now .... for the photon ... we are told that there is no medium.

The only medium are the waves themselves. (????)

Do you want to look at , (waves are particle-like and particles are wave-like), the surface of “Bloch ball/ Bloch sphere”?
jal

Hi Laserlight,
1/ The DSE shows beyond reasonable doubt that the 'wave' involved is a sinewave.
3/ In the case of EM waves .. no medium has ever been detected
6/ Since the wave is a sinewave (beyond reasonable doubt) .. none of these points apply. As a point of interest .. you should consider the bandwidth ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwidth ) required by your proposed pulse.. surely this would be detectable?
8/. Wave energy may propagate within and along interface .. depending on the properties if the surface.
9. A wave is (by definition) a continuous (as of 'no grit' ) phenomenon.
Best wishes,
-C2

Jal,

That is the current "political" position of academia and "science" since the time
of the Michelson-Morely experiment failed to detect the "Ether"(Aether).
Since the CMB is considered residual primordial energy that exists throughout
the observable universe, is the denial of the Aether really valid? Also, there
are other lower energy components intertwined with the CMB in the form of
low energy infrared (temperature) that permeate space and anywhere there
is "vacuum"/nothing.

I find myself in disagreement with authoritarian science and academia that
insist that there is no Aether or energy transport medium in vacuum. I have
stated my beliefs previously that higher energy forms propagate on lower
energy "conduits" (media) that are the underlying fabric of the space-time
continuum of the universe. I have also proposed that EM fields cross couple their
energy with these ambient background energies that exist everywhere. Just
because you cannot understand the interactions of different forms of energy
doesn't necessarily mean that it doesn't happen. I will post a link that I found
last night that somewhat indirectly supports some of my recent discussions.

The current fad is to call this underlying energy "strings" which leads to all
kinds of theoretical and mathematical variations of string theories and extra
dimensions. Is energy a dimension, that remains to be accurately defined.
Perhaps it is, or is it merely free form ambient standing wave energy (or vacuoles,
as some would call it) that exists in the confinement volume of the universe.

We do know that energy applied to matter creates motion that can be converted
to different forms and concentrations of energy. That concept works in both
directions. Energy and matter are directly correlated, so doesn't it seem likely
that different forms of energy can also interact by some, as yet unexplained,
mutual coupling capability? I think this is ultimately where string theory is leading
us, and eventually a much simplified and clear explanation will emerge, that
supports my proposed cross coupling concept.

The Motional Electric Field
http://www.rexresearch.com/hooper/horizon.htm

Regards,
LL

Hi C2,

Good input, deserving of some "clarification".

I have no disagreement that a propagating energy pulse can be mathematically
described as a sinewave. Propagation is an energy recirculating "build and
collapse" regenerative effect.

Are you sure about this, or has it indeed been detected but not yet understood in
all of its implications? After all such a finding and disclosure would rock the
foundations of theoretical science to its foundations and prove embarrassing along
the lines of "the world isn't flat" or "the universe revolves around the earth".
See my previous post to Jal on the CMB and its longer term implications on the
status quo thinking of the aether.

All wave energy can be described as a moving pulse whose energy "rotates" as it
propagates along a time vector. Rotation is a function of energy change over
time and distance.

Bandwidth is a range of frequencies and can be part of the energy contained within
a wave, usually as "sidebands".

Any interface between different types of media will change the diffraction
characteristics of the wave energy coupling to it.

Are you contesting that a waves total energy can be divided? I can cite numerous
examples of energy division for every kind of wave that you can present.
Even the energy contained in a laser beam can be divided. The ISL shows energy
halving by the square of the distance. Wave energy follows the ISL. In the
case of light, the power/intensity changes with distance from the source.

Regards,
LL

This post has been edited by Laserlight on Feb 5 2007, 12:44 AM