Problem with the two slit experiment, Observing later

Hello "THEY", and all,



Like all good deadlines, mine was delayed! I plan on returning in a few days.


I thought that we might have had some more posts from GE and LL. What happened to Laserlight?


How is the new venture, C2? I hope well, for you & family.



Ciao!

T.Roc

They're playing on the monkey bars on the playground. I'm not kidding.

Hi "THEY", "THEY2", TRoc, yquantum, Neil Farbstein, Laserlight, Confused2 et al,

I am still here, just lacking in inspiration. I have been able to dig some relevant information up which will be interesting to you all. I suspect this will also interest Neil in his endeavours. I am sure this will also be some interest to "THEY" as well...

Thread still here and being watched but Confused2 is looking after his new business and there have been few interesting things to report on so I have switched attention to yquantum's thread "Particles have mass, HOW?". There were a couple of things I wanted to say "again" that were probably more relevant "over there". TRoc is also still around. I will be going on a few days leave next weekend to a quiet beach so there is an explanation for any break in the thread due to me during that period.

In the meantime more elven musings have become mainstream... the symmetry of atomic orbitals in atoms have been independently manipulated showing that matter waves influence chemical bonding independently of electron charge and spin. In some ground breaking experiments the orbital states have been manipulated to produce chemical bonding in molecules that are not natural enhancing or changing some of their chemical and physical properties.

... Click to enlarge...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/...71012095246.htm
http://dailyheadlines.uark.edu/11593.htm
Supporting online material available...
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/1149338/DC1

For the first time the matter wave shells of atoms have been shown to be independent of the electrons and influence bonding and thus the final properties of molecules. The "shells" are independently multiply inter-penetrating and spatially shared volumetric cavities in which all the electrons are resonantly trapped and can apparently be independently modified using nanomaterials leading to the different bonding types in molecules. Note that electrons are considered as "matter" while photons are "bosons" yet in the cavities many electrons can be hidden simultaneously in much of the same dimensional space. Why is there so little interaction between "mutually charged" electrons and how can they cohabit so easily?

Most of these "shells" are actually simply volumetric spaces which overlap each other traditionally representing the individual electron "probability density function". This shown that it must be in error in that the electrons and the "shells" represent independently manipulatable properties. I lack the ability to completely analyze this problem in space quantization of the electrons but I find it amazing you can stack so many "matter" particles into the one overall volume together. In "elven theory" these shells represent the hybridized bosonic supersymmetric twin of the nuclear fermion "ensemble" of matter particles. A massless shadow partner of the fermions. This is the inverse of the traditional view but this is because my view relates "reciprocal" states and tips this view on its head swapping sides in this diagram..

The bosons IMHO are the massless superpartners and the ferrmions have all the mass from "our point of view" (observer frame). The frantic search for supersymmetric partners was totally ignoring the "shells" as possible contenders. These "shells" accompany all fermions. For instance a single proton is not only a particle but it is also (and simultaneously...) an atomic ion (of Hydrogen... the original primal stuff of the Universe). It is both the fermion and the boson. You can take the "particle" out of the "atom" but you can't take the "atom" out of the"particle".

The relevance of this point is not lost in the Double Slit Experiment where we can also modify the shells in resonant states using the Aharanov-Bohm Effect. Passing a DC current through the separating bar between individual slits shifts the interference pattern seen. The pattern "seen" is a collective view of the propagating photons (or in this case a moving electrons) "side on" so these "shifts" in phase represent an altered cavity resonance.

... Click to enlarge...
Maybe if the AB influence is sufficiently energetic a higher excited state in photons could lead to "something very new and exciting (optically)" for the Double Slit Experiment? A close reading of the paper above might be interesting. Unfortunately the paper cannot be directly downloaded but a secondary (perhaps temporary) link is found below.

I would also like to remark that this illustration shows a "pure" Gaussian envelope instead of an Airy Disk, and I disagree with that interpretation. In the case of an electron some electron de Broglie wave would be possible to detect even though electrons represent a tighter and more highly confined packet and should exhibit a shorter wavelength.

Cheers

PS: On a low note Robert W. Bussard passed away in the last couple of days. There goes a real pioneer in Fusion Research. I hope someone carries on his research but it is difficult to see the funding and the enthusiasm continuing without its chief protagonist.

This post has been edited by Good Elf on Oct 14 2007, 12:51 AM

Hello Good Elf, et al.

This is just a thought but can we consider "orbitals" as "talbot carpets" generated by matter waves from oscillating/vibrating quarks within the proton. The carpet would provides low energy points around the nucleus that form repeating series.

Hi Montec,

Well done... It is not merely a "thought"... it is directly analogous. For sure it is realized that there is a strong relationship between the matter waves of trapped electrons and the electromagnetic waves of photons. I was hoping everyone was seeing this point. Unfortunately I cannot illustrate this Quantum Chromodynamic analogy since I am pretty sure this has not occurred to many that we are dealing with the next level of the Holographic Universe. I am sure that it is there but quantum theory was not designed to find these structures because these "carpets" are entirely a "neo-classical phenomena".

Sufficient experimental work has been done to show this relationship at the level of Quantum Electrodynamics and I must "wave my arms and make grand gestures" to say that this repeats within further dimensional sub-components and at lower levels. We can certainly see this initial relationship below. The quark is a particle with apparent mass. The probably density function of the quark is the only current way to interpret the data is one such difficulty. The development of this idea has not been with a view to simplify the concept in line with "elven theory". Pulling quarks apart to make "free quarks" is a difficult problem and I think it may relate to something more fundamental such as the three three dimensional elemental basis vectors. Still there will be aspects that relate to what we can measure at the scale of QED. It is important to understand that the word "seeing" being used is not a very good way to think of this phenomenon. This QCD aspect is probably not within our ability to measure at this point in time.

It is easier to deal with what we presently know about QED than to get too specific as to what the structures seen at the next level of the Universe might mean. I am prepared to let the HEP Guys handle the paradigms for the moment. Regarding QED... The atomic "shells" are the "reciprocal space" in which the particle or wave can play a role. An orbital "shell" can absorb both photons and electrons equally. Additionally an electron can absorb a photon in addition to the existing photon that composed it. Wheels within wheels... The dynamic "Talbot Carpet" is what happens in time to particles which evolve with time... They are particles with mass traveling less than the speed of light. Photons are also similar to the electron but they are not evolving in time because they are "events" that have no internal time progression (suffering 100% Time Dilation as a quantum) because they travel at the speed of light. They are simply evolving spatially as Talbot discovered.

Here is an animation created by Rochester University showing the electron wave evolving with time with a similar sequence to the Talbot Carpet.
Motion of a Circular Orbit Wave Packet
If you compare this with the Talbot carpets you will notice the exact same sequences of caustics spatially evolving there....
Quantum carpets, carpets of light

... The repeating sequence of maxima.

Consider that what the photon does by spatially spreading the electron does in time. Now the perspective the external observer brings to a particle is that it is "moving in time". Thus the electron exhibits this temporal change. The evolving pattern should also be seen as occupying a shell rather than a "plane orbit" as illustrated here. This same pattern seen from the internal perspective of "reciprocal space and reciprocal time" is the same perspective we see in the DSE as internal observes of the "internal resonant photon" that compose the reciprocal particle state seen on the outside.. The electron particle is a fermion (time evolution) and the photon (space spreading) is the boson. Both aspects exhibiting together but in different realms. The time domain (electron) and the frequency domain (photon)... This is because the electron is nothing but a photon "spreading at the speed of light" on the "inside" of a restricted particle membrane and seen from the outside at a velocity less than the speed of light and "confined".

Good one Montec...

Cheers

I've been musing about the Holographic Principle and I wanted to throw an idea out there.

What if instead of thinking of our 3+1 dimensional world as a projection of 2+1 D space, we instead consider particles as a protrusion into our higer dimensional space from a lower one. Think of a photon as a packet of energy that is too dense for 2d space that bubbles into the third dimension of our space. What would appear to us as nonlocal behavior in 3+1 dimensions could be local within the underlying 2+1 dimensions.

Any thoughts?

Hi Wulf,

The idea that everything is much "flatter" when seen from our space is very appealing but I would not stop at simply 2D+1 dimensions. With that in mind the two dimensional paradigm being on the boundary of our three dimensional world seems a logical extension with the ability to create something from nothing is also very appealing. The nearest analogy is the world of Alice and her Looking Glass Universe. The "2D +1 plane" of the looking glass Universe looks and behaves identically to the three dimensional world that exists on "our side" of the plane. It apparently occupies a three dimensional space but we also know that it is simply a surface with no actual extension to the interior of another world. Still it is every bit as valid as "our" Universe obeying all "our" laws in a "simulated spatial volume". However Alice's World is not actually obeying the physics of our world and it is simply a photonic image. The idea that particles as looking glass Universes reflecting the exterior apparently three dimensional Universe at first seems fanciful until we realize that in a quantum sense reflections of matter waves in unseen spherical surfaces of particles or sub-atomic particles can have all the solidity of real particles and looking glass atoms can even enter into chemical bonds with real "non-looking glass" atoms. The experiments were carried out over ten years ago and the whole facts are truly mind boggling. These are the Kondo Phantoms whose reality are dependent on some exterior reality through reflection. It is not a great step in imagination to understand that our Universe may also be a simple surface, a reflection of another even more exterior reality unseen with human eyes since the physics of such spaces are confined to the surface and the surface alone yet creating additional spatial volumes where originally there was none. This is a way of extending spacetime without any real spatial penalty. Obviously this is a form of holographic principle in a way I have "romanced" previously in these threads. You can "Google" this stuff if you like.

The two dimensional paradigm of the quantum corral and the associated Kondo Phantoms is just a starting point and reflecting surfaces everywhere in the quantum Universe at matter wavelengths, not optical wavelengths, are the reality behind perfect systems emulating the physics of other "apparently higher dimensional" realms. Do not confuse this idea with light reflections since light can never provide this "solidity"... this is the realm of de Broglie Matter Waves...
Quantum Mirages - Kondo Phantoms


... Click to enlarge...
Here we see the "quantum corral" where the image is a matter wave image at the opposite focus of an ellipse. The "matter wave mirages" are "reconstructing the source atoms" with significant wave function amplitudes even though the "corral" is hardly a real barrier to the space filling matter waves. These "phantom atoms" have all the chemical properties of the real atom with their associated Kondo orbitals and Kondo electrons etc... but only persist while the real atom persists as the "artist's model". It is like having "imaginary numbers" when you really know that there is really nothing "imaginary" about the root of minus 1 at all. These "critters" are no phantoms or mirages and respond to the laws of physics the same way as we do and they would even better emulate reality in systems where the reflections of matter waves are "perfect", "closed" and "unseen". Clearly they represent "matter resonances". You will need to "dig" to find this additional material and you will need resources to discover these additional points but you will be surprised to find out what lurks in "quantum shadows".

The principle must exist in other ways in matter wave reflections in the two dimensional relativistic surfaces of particles. Light waves cannot partake in these reconstructions but the much higher frequency matter waves can... as an unseen reality "guiding" the internal construction of these "crystal ball" Universes. Internally .... hidden from view there would be matter wave reconstructions of "everything" external to the particle in an internal "informational reciprocal space"... A reality behind the AdS/CFT Conjecture of Maldacena.
Introduction to the Maldacena Conjecture on AdS/CFT
... Though my interpretation differs slightly from a direct application as shown here.

Perhaps these are the parallel "looking glass" Universes needed by quantum theory... each subatomic particle a physical reflection of the unseen orthogonal external Universe each with a different aspect of the "original" exhibiting the different delays in travel time of light, and with the physics mimicry, each little Universe slightly different to any other since they all occupy different positions in space due to "space quantization".

Cheers

This post has been edited by Good Elf on Oct 24 2007, 02:18 PM

Hi Good Elf!
I've just posted something that might help you in what you are trying to say.
Its under "BOUNCE IS BETTER THAN BANG"
Its about the Schwarzschild radius.
Jal

Good Elf (Posted Oct 13 2007, 11:55 PM):

Thanks for the links, trying to keep on the "content", your shifting double slit interference patterns i wanted to address, but first a look at some of the links.

http://www.fkf.mpg.de/keimer/Publist/PDF_2...akhalian_01.pdf

{{Orbital Reconstruction and Covalent Bonding at an Oxide Interface
J. Chakhalian 1*, J. W. Freeland 2, H.-U. Habermeier 3, G. Cristiani 3, G. Khaliullin 3, M. van Veenendaal 4, B. Keimer 3}}

[comments-rm: the above link gives one Figure, and I notice that the chemical molecule given, by the below Figure 1 description, the MnCuO10 is shown

{{Figure1: (A)Schematicoftheexperimental setupusedtoobtaintheXASandXLDdatain
TEYandFYmodes. DatasensitivetointerfacialCu(Mn)atomsweretakeninTEYmodewith
photonenergiesneartheCu(Mn)L-absorptionedge,onsampleswithLCMO(YBCO)capping
layers. Toobtainasizabledichroism, thefilmplanewas tiltedwithrespect tothephoton
beampropagationdirection. (B)AtomicpositionsneartheLCMO-YBCOinterface[16]. The
MnCuO10clusterusedfortheexact-diagonalizationcalculationsishighlighted. }}

as a two joined dual pentahedron with a common base of four Oxygen atoms, the bottom vertex of Oxygen of which is also the apex of a bottom pentahedron that has a base of four Oxygen atoms. The top dual pentahedron and the axially attached bottom pentahedron have centers, Mn on top, Cu on the bottom.

So the CuMnC10 or MnCuO10 if passing though a double slit with a current running through the center of the double slit would require the outer ten electrons to spread or converge if they are to move transerserly to the direction of the magnetic field surrounding the central "wire" that established the division between the slits.

Do I have the physics correct here?

The double slit descriptions continue to confuse me. Yes, in physics under division I and others did to the straight line construction through the two slits, meeting at the display plane, and did get to "see" the adding and subtraction effects.

So this is done for "photons" and for "electrons". No problem with the abstract of using pencil lines to represent the path of either photon or of electrons. Only a matter of wavelengths.

So you can imagine that I don't have problems with G-string conjectures and the Higgs Particles which appear to be universal gravity force connections.

Good Elf (Posted Oct 13 2007, 11:55 PM):

Thanks for the links, trying to keep on the "content", your shifting double slit interference patterns i wanted to address, but first a look at some of the links.

http://www.fkf.mpg.de/keimer/Publist/PDF_2...akhalian_01.pdf

{{Orbital Reconstruction and Covalent Bonding at an Oxide Interface
J. Chakhalian 1*, J. W. Freeland 2, H.-U. Habermeier 3, G. Cristiani 3, G. Khaliullin 3, M. van Veenendaal 4, B. Keimer 3}}

[comments-rm: the above link gives one Figure, and I notice that the chemical molecule given, by the below Figure 1 description, the MnCuO10 is shown

{{Figure1: (A)Schematicoftheexperimental setupusedtoobtaintheXASandXLDdatain
TEYandFYmodes. DatasensitivetointerfacialCu(Mn)atomsweretakeninTEYmodewith
photonenergiesneartheCu(Mn)L-absorptionedge,onsampleswithLCMO(YBCO)capping
layers. Toobtainasizabledichroism, thefilmplanewas tiltedwithrespect tothephoton
beampropagationdirection. (B)AtomicpositionsneartheLCMO-YBCOinterface[16]. The
MnCuO10clusterusedfortheexact-diagonalizationcalculationsishighlighted. }}

as a two joined dual pentahedron with a common base of four Oxygen atoms, the bottom vertex of Oxygen of which is also the apex of a bottom pentahedron that has a base of four Oxygen atoms. The top dual pentahedron and the axially attached bottom pentahedron have centers, Mn on top, Cu on the bottom.

So the CuMnC10 or MnCuO10 if passing though a double slit with a current running through the center of the double slit would require the outer ten electrons to spread or converge if they are to move transerserly to the direction of the magnetic field surrounding the central "wire" that established the division between the slits.

Do I have the physics correct here?

The double slit descriptions continue to confuse me. Yes, in physics under division I and others did to the straight line construction through the two slits, meeting at the display plane, and did get to "see" the adding and subtraction effects.

So this is done for "photons" and for "electrons". No problem with the abstract of using pencil lines to represent the path of either photon or of electrons. Only a matter of wavelengths.

So you can imagine that I don't have problems with G-string conjectures and the Higgs Particles which appear to be universal gravity force connections.

Thanks for your link. Checking out Maldacena ideas, is at same institute as Witten, Ladacena appears at Glascow Conference a couple years ago and spoke there also Hawkin. Malcacena posted his handwritten notes, neat parallel lines ",

"|***|***|***|" the stars, the particles, change with horizonal time, the discussion at the Glasco Conference to my mind "... was a black hole center electron?.

I have mixed ideas developed over the years,

electrons: if smallest of forms of matter we "experience", "measurre"... doing a social science, a torus has no end, it contains an imaginary center, what keeps the donut from swrinking to "nothing" is, at the least , spin.

higgs might favor unknown nature of infinity or it's recipical, so concepts like

positive vrs negative only requires a look at both.

Best, rmuldavin.

maybe instead of measuring the electron directly, set your device to measure the effects the electron has on the molecules it passes through?

Hi RMuldavin,

First... I cannot see that file I do not know why.

I take it you are referring to the Aharonov-Bohm Effect. The essence of this experiment is the use of superconductors in that "bar" so that no "field" leaks out from the "core" into the slits, it is a quantum barrier and acts as a dislocation in spacetime that propagates to "infinity" away from the slits. The point of the experiment is not a glorified type of Kerr Cell Experiment but a non-local effect that is not due to any fields at all.

The result has been confirmed by experiment.

Conventionally the electron is a "true point source" or at least it is indistinguishable from it at very high energy. Yet this particle has an electric dipole moment and a mass. The paper by Williamson and Van der Mark show a torus "connection" but regardless of this "depiction" it still may occupy a spherical space in much the same way that a video game like Asteroids is "connected toroidally" yet exist on a flat rectangular closed space.
Play the actual game here...
http://www.squadron13.com/games/asteroids/asteroids.htm
May need to fiddle a little and follow the instructions a bit... It works though...
Picture of the "Asteroids toroidally connected two dimensional Universe"...

... Click to enlarge...
This is the simplest connection of a class of even more complex spatial connections. It is doubtful that spacetime is simply connected affinely. This is the result gleaned from the COBE and the WMAP Data...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COBE
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/23009
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/.../1/PWcos3_09-05
This means our Universe is possibly a multiply toroidally connected Dodecahedral closed "spherical" space with a 36 degree "twist".

The electron may be higher dimensional embedded in our three dimensional space. I think of it a bit like the Mobius Transformation shown near the bottom of this article...

... Click to enlarge..
The electron is "embedded in a higher space" while the projection of the "object" exhibits a point like source divergence and a dipole moment as well. This picture above is a three dimensional sphere with a two dimensional surface "embedded" near to another two dimensional surface (four separate dimensions in all, two "closed" and two "open"). The projection of this object into the two dimensional "flatspace" is similar to a two dimensional (three dimensional?) equivalent of a point source with a magnetic dipole field of an electron.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%B6bius_transformation
The electron has virtually no footprint in the "flatspace" but has "extension" in higher dimensions leading to the dipole moment. The "sphere" exhibits a compact source of dimensional space near to the two dimensional flatspace and the "connection" between dimensions is left undefined here but each realm may be energetically separate and the disconnect is the result of the nature of the embedding.

Cheers

This post has been edited by Good Elf on Oct 26 2007, 02:28 PM

I have some question. Do can two photons interfere or only photon can interference with himself? For example, what distance was between two small holes in Young experiment? Smaller than light wave lenght (about 500 nm) or much bigger distance?

Hi DavidD,

There are many controversial points here, I will supply an opinion. Two separate source coherent photons can interfere with each other under those exceptional circumstances but usually they only interfere with themselves. It is very difficult to produce source coherent simultaneous photons. One possible source is down converted and entangled photons. LASER sources normally do not produce this kind of radiation alone. The double slit interference occurs when single photons interfere with themselves and they 'spread" through both slits as waves, "unobserved". The size of the photons at the slits or at the pinholes cover both apertures but still manage to pass both perforations without being blocked.

If the slits themselves are smaller than the wavelength of the light, light can only get through within the evanescent region so it does not propagate past slits to any great extent. Your question (I think) was if the distance between the pinholes was less than a wavelength of the light then internal interference only occurs within the evanescent region and in the far field if the sum of the size of the pinholes is considerably larger than the wavelength you will see only an Airy Pattern. What this means is the light through a slot or pinhole in the far field is not disturbed by obstructions much smaller than the wavelength of (coherent) light.

Cheers

Say we want make Yung experiment. We want see interference of light from sun or from Incandescent light bulb. We make two small pinholes and say distance between them is 10000 nm and sun light wave lenght is about 500 nm. So do we see light interference? Pinholes diameter is say a) 150 nm; b ) 1000 nm.

If distance between two pinholes can't be bigger than lenght of wave, then I think it's means, that light interference is each photon interfere with himself. And it's means, that two photons can't interfere with each over. Am I right?

This post has been edited by DavidD on Oct 28 2007, 11:09 AM

I think I understood. Photon can interfere with over photon. Photon can interfere with himself.
But what will be if there is thin glass or soap film, which is 125 nm thinkness and photon lenght is 500 nm. And flying one photon and one part photon is reflected from glass or film surface and another part photon is gpong trough glass and reflcted from another side of glass or soap film and shifted 180 degrees. So then photon will interfere with himself and will disapear ? Or photon from 4 times smaller 'obstacle' will be reflected without spliting into two parts?