Problem with the two slit experiment, Observing later

LL,
You say of the single photon DSE

This seems to be a way of avoiding saying that the counts give the 'amplitide of the wave' as if there had been zillions of photons present (your electromagnetic wave/light). To make a wave we would (by definition) have given lots of photons a common timing and phase relationship and they would have emerged with a common timing and phase relationship. From time to time we mention that photons don't interfere with other photons .. in fact they ignore each other. The only difference the number of photons would make is how quickly the pattern (count) builds up.
I think your comment remains relevent..

I can only ask you to look at the graph of counts again .. maybe the ripple tank picture that Good Elf posts from time to time. One photon .. same pattern. More photons, same pattern, Ripple tank, same pattern. Impossible!
At the bottom of Duality's posts she puts
"Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding."
-C2.

Confused2. What good is an experiment which when you try to check on what is going on, it does not work? I agree with Nick that it's just a phenomenon. Everything has to be exact, otherwise it doesn't work.

C2,

You took what I said out of context so it lost its meaning. I also said that
I disagree with the idea of all the possible solutions, that probability provides
to give a final answer, that only provides a solution that outlines the bounds of a
qaussian curve progressively. I favor of an equation that provides
only the correct solutions and excludes all wrong solutions provided by probability.

To my mind this is where resonance and harmony come into the solution since
there is a "progressive" mirror nature to the photon pattern in the x and
y planes. There is nothing "random" about the pattern projected on the screen.
The main center lobe is the high power "full note" point of maximum
coupled resonant energy, while each symmetrical side lobe in turn loses energy
which appears to indicate 3/4 note, 1/2 note, 1/4 note power levels on each
side of the full note.

This phenomenon is not probability. I'm not a mathmetician, but I think this
is a quadradic type of equation, solving for the area under each lobe provides
the solution set. Perhaps someone can correct me if my assumption is
incorrect.
http://www.teachspin.com/instruments/two_s..._combiplot2.gif

Comments, corrections, other opinions welcome.

Regards,
LL

This post has been edited by Laserlight on Nov 26 2006, 03:48 PM

Good Elf and All,

A photon can be considered a single "on" bit of specific energy information
(it represents 1 digitally), that is radiating and propagating in all directions from
the originating source event. Basically, it says that a point event occurred where
energy was converted from one form to another form at some point in time.
It represents some energy level in time.

The "1" bit is "locally" decoded if it interacts with an atom of matter, but the rest
of the 1 bit information being carried by the wave continues unobstructed until
it is absorbed, reflected, or refracted by interaction with other matter. So the
wave collapse is a purely local phenomenon that occurs when the EM polarities
of the wave energy, and the atom it is interacting with, are exactly phase and
timing coincident. This would be the harmonic mixing frequency between
energy levels. This is the mechanism for detection to take place.
This has some potential implications in that it suggests that adjoining atoms in a
matrix of matter are slightly out of electromagnetic and time phase due to their
atomic charge interactions. Since electron charges oppose each other, the atoms
in non single crystal lattices are out of phase alignment.

This would explain why the randomly oriented silver crystals in photographic film are selective
in detecting discrete parts of the photon energy of the radiating wave, and not the
entire energy of the wave. The lattice orientation of the silver atoms in each
crystal, assuming each crystal is randomly oriented, only detect the part of the
EM photon wave that is exactly oriented with the EM phasing of the silver lattice
in the crystal. The full photon wave is striking the surface of the film,
but only properly phase aligned atoms are responding to and detecting the
spread out (distributed) energy of the wavefront. It is all about EM field alignments
and harmonic interaction.

I am suggesting that this localized effect is the same in all matter and that the
localized atomic EM field phasing displacements, and the plane orientation of their
charges, determine the sensitivity to the incoming EM enery photon field.
If the EM fields between the arriving photon wavefront and an atom are in phase,
detection (absorption) takes place. When detection takes place, the energy of
the photon's EM wave is absorbed, and the byproduct is radiated away as infrared
radiation. The electrons in the absorbing atoms rise to a higher energy state and
become more mobile between adjacent atoms causing ionization of the atoms,
and potential energy is converted to kinetic energy. Heat is the byproduct.

If the incoming EM fields of the photon wavefront are out of phase with the atoms
that they strike, rejection/reflection of the photon wavefront energy takes place
with little direct interaction.

Comments, opinions, corrections, discussion welcomed by all. Be ready to defend
your position.

LL

This post has been edited by Laserlight on Nov 26 2006, 06:45 PM

Laserlight

Sound plausible to me.
Someone must have tried some experiment to verify this "idea".
TRoc


It’s a gem!! You came late for the party but you are making it real!
I’m going to enter it into the discussion and summary.
jal

Hi LL, jal, TRoc, GE, Duality et al,

Mostly to LL,

http://www.teachspin.com/instruments/two_s..._combiplot2.gif

The height of the peaks we see is the result of the number of photons available in the region of interest .. we derived it some time back from the diffraction effect of each slit individually ( formula here -> http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase...pt/mulslid.html in the plot of results (the triangles) - from the results supplied and the diffraction equations we can work out the width of each slit if that is in any doubt.

Opening both slits didn't add or subtract any photons (checked within 10% but probably true to the nth degree of accuracy.) .

To calculate the distribution of the photons available after the diffraction effect has been taken into consideration we have the DSE formula -> http://schools.matter.org.uk/Content/Inter...ce/formula.html . In reality this has not taken account of the sinusoidal nature of the waveform .. a more sophisticated approach would give the sin^2 result that we observe.

The above predictions suggest there is certainly nothing random about the curve. The same equations work for DSE's in ripple tanks and other places. I don't understand what you mean by 3/4 note, 1/2 note and 1/4 note power levels.. do they predict the same distribution?
Any (almost) curve can be represented by a power series .. it is a general rule but not in general a predictive rule.

One thing we don't know is how wide the aperture of the detector is .. obviously when it is one position it will only count photons within its detection zone. By joining up the dots we make a prediction about the number of photons the counter would count even if it is not actually in a particular position.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by this .. do you accept that for any given photon there is a very high probability that it will end in the a place where the detector will not detect it? Since there is only one detector and it covers a very small part of the total region we have to make some assumptions about what happens in the rest of the region of interest. Do you think it is reasonable to assume that the same number of photons end up in a particular region whether or not the detector is not there to detect them?
-C2.

Edit- Some edits to get the links to work properly

This post has been edited by Confused2 on Nov 26 2006, 11:10 PM

Hi C2 and All,

C2, it is obvious that we are describing very different parts of the same elephant. I
believe that I'm holding the trunk and you are holding the tail....but then
again it could be the other way around. LOL!

Earlier on in the discussion, you were suggesting that the photon
interference patterns of the DSE followed the theory of probability. I was
arguing against that. According to probability, the photons could arrive
anywhere in the area of the solution set. My argument was that no, the pattern
outlined by the photon hits was not a matter of probability but of a finite and
predictable solution set. That was the point that I was trying to make.

Regarding the comment about the detector position. It was my understanding that
it was optimized to insure that all arriving photons would be detected within
its optical field of view, (except perhaps for some on the x periphery). I'm betting
that if the detector "focal length" from the slits was increased the pattern
size would increase correspondingly by virtue of the ISL.

Hmmm, I recall counting the number of photons on each of the DSE wave patterns
and commented that there were 15 photon hits on the edge of each subsequent
wave and each sidelobe wave is a different mirrored height. I agree that the
single slit curves are a diffraction pattern scattering effect, caused by the delay
time difference created by the diffracted angle of flight.

My comment about the full, 3/4, 1/2, and 1/4 power levels as a function of
the area of the waves should relate to power functions, which are basically
harmonics of the fundamental. The sidelobes look like they are following
standard predictable harmonic power levels, which can be associated with
notes in music.

Do you have an explanation for the amplitude increase of the center wave,
and the decreasing amplitudes of each subsequent side lobe, that is different
from my assertion? Do you have an explanation for why individual photons
arriving one after the other still exhibit a wave interference phenomenon, when
it is obvious that they are not interfering with each other?

The common element here is the center post of the DSE, which as a whole, is
acting like an oscillator cavity and signal amplifier, IMO.

Comments, alternative logic welcome. We are seeking the truth about just
what an elephant is, but first we must agree what we all are "seeing" is the
same part of the elephant.

LL

This post has been edited by Laserlight on Nov 27 2006, 12:33 AM

Hi LL,
I would be happy to attempt an alternative analysis on the basis of the introduction of harmonics .. but you'll have to explain how you would like me to start because the ripple tank seems to be single frequency, the DSE seems to be single frequency, the predictions look pretty exact RIPPLE TANK = GOOD .. how can I help?
There are often practical compromises in real experiments. In the case of the DSE there is a compromise between making each slit so narrow that you have very few photons to count and making them wide enough that the overlap of the diffraction zone still leaves you (say) 5 to 7 good and identifiable peaks. The centre post is where the path lengths from both slits add up to an integer and the number of photons from each slit is at its greatest (diffraction equation and graph here -> http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase...pt/mulslid.html )

The basis for much that has gone before is that photons do not interfere with each other. A single photon is quite enough for interference to occur. Single photons, ONE AT A TIME build up to the same pattern as the STEADY STATE RIPPLE TANK (!). RIPPLE TANK = GOOD. EXPERIMENT =GOOD. PHOTON = VERY VERY VERY BAD!
I know it is mpossible .. please.. focus on http://www.teachspin.com/instruments/two_s..._combiplot2.gif .. the experiment is fine, the results are fine .. IT IS THE PHOTONS THEMSELVES - THEY DO IT INDIVIDUALLY - BY THEMSELVES.
This is the DSE ... an experiment.. I am not expecting you (or even me) to believe the result .. just look at it and see what it shows. It's a showstopper .. it's a nightmare .. the greatest brains on the planet have ground to a halt on this one. It can be analysed 'made sense of' .. but we (both) will have to start very sloooooowly.
-C2.

This post has been edited by Confused2 on Nov 27 2006, 01:27 AM

C2,

Yep, I've studied the multiple slit diffraction patterns of constant wavefronts.
I see the same result that you do and am satisfied by the results...partially!
I want the fine details of the interaction of the slits with the energy wave of
the photons, and am strongly supporting the harmonic theory proposed by
TRoc, but I believe there is more to it than just signal mixing in the secondary
cavity.

As for the single photon experiment, the single photon is being interfered with by
the cavity comprised of the center post and slit geometry. I would be willing to
bet that if you only allowed 1 photon thru every 10s that the pattern would be
much different and be a dispersion of points scattered around a central point.

Why do I say that? My contention is that the oscillations, which I suspect are
being induced into the cavities by the photons as they traverse the slits, are
increasing in power and intensity sequentially, with additional energy being
provided by each passing photon. IMO, the trailing photons are being influenced
by the increasing intensity of the oscillations, as they enter close behind the previous
photon, which changes the signal mixing ratio in a harmonic way.
The increase in available energy affects each subsequent photon in a non-linear
fashion, which causes the decreasing mirror image diffraction lobe results.
I suspect that there is a maximum power point or "saturation level" that occurs
in the cavities at some point, but the experiment, as conducted, doesn't provide any evidence of that.

Comments? Anyone is welcome to provide their 2c.
LL

This post has been edited by Laserlight on Nov 27 2006, 03:16 AM

Hi Laserlight and Confused2 et al,

I think you are right and this was the basis of a previous theory discussed earlier in this thread. The differences in interpretation is very important. It is my view that if you use a very attenuated coherent laser source such that only one photon every 10 seconds would pass the slit then "unseen" photons will still provide a framework for the individual "real" photon passing the slit and "exciting the chamber". What I would also like to point out is the time of passing through the chamber has no influence on the chamber excitation. The chamber is "already excited" as the photon begins its journey and any physical changes to the chamber does not alter this pattern. This may seem "enigmatic" but I would say that the event already knows just what will be happening independent of time. The information (as it were ) is processed asynchronously. So while you change the configuration of the chamber between when the photon is released and when it is absorbed, it has already taken this phenomenon into account the moment the event started in our time. This principle can be extended to the chamber as well because it will harmonically resonate if photons are absorbed. nevertheless the waves in the chamber are fixed for individual photons even though the walls are possibly flexing in time.

I still maintain that this is no "ripple tank" where every part of the tank is subjected to successive progressive modification. In a "ripple tank" the waves themselves alter the way in which the chamber reacts. For any standing waves the waves must "bounce around" and this does take time. For light it has two aspects... the propagating photon and the standing wave pattern. Neither of these phenomena can we actually see. The propagating photon part seems to conform to the envelope we usually call the particle and the standing wave pattern may be "preexisting" at all frequencies as a superposition (if you get my drift). This physical series of slits and cavities behave totally differently at different frequencies. Each of these frequencies are "independent" solutions of the cavity states existing in the same space at the same time. Indeed if you changed the frequency of your photons you would see just that even if you made no changes to any other component. A static pattern exists for all frequencies. They may not be used but they exist in potential. These cavities will dynamically change the "light and dark" zones. The interesting zones are the dark zones. These are regions where it is unlikely to detect a photon of the nominated frequency if such photons did exist. It is also interesting to note that all the photons move independently of each other in the cavity with different light and dark zones for each uncorrelated source. This means that while the brightness zones for each internally correlated source are predictable, a nearby uncorrelated source can occupy the same space with a displaced pattern while the two patterns sum spatially, not as vectors, but as pure scalars.

If you take two sources displaced from each other by a small distance and are uncorrelated, the patterns simply "merge" even if they are at the same frequency. The patterns displaced "approximately" by the angular displacement. Because photons do not interfere with each other... they 'coexist" in the same space. In this case "fractionally" displaced from each other. I think this gives insight into the process of "superposition of states" and potentially just what the collapse of a state may mean.

As additional data I would like you to see these images which were taken as two dimensional slices across a microwave waveguide illustrating the standing waves found there. This is definitely a cavity excitation and you can see this at microwave frequencies. Here are "Schrodinger Solutions"...

(Click on image) This article was originally discovered by Jal and the thread can be picked up here...

Jal's Original Reference to this technology
There are other images you can download from the archive. These are cavity standing wave solutions to Schrodinger Equations in 2D. For further edification here are Atomic Schrodinger standing waves recently imaged as well for comparison.
Single atom shells imaged for the first time using STM.

It is noted that these actual STM Images show "unknown" orbitals and this is still subject to "investigation". Once again "standing waves".

Cheers

This post has been edited by Good Elf on Nov 27 2006, 11:18 AM

Hi Good Elf, Laserlight et al,

Once again I feel 'explanations' are obscuring the field.

The experimental result is that http://www.teachspin.com/instruments/two_s..._combiplot2.gif is the same curve as for a ripple tank with steady state excitation by a single frequency.

At this stage my only claim is that the result is there for all to see. IMHO anyone attempting to explain anything else has lost track of the way explanations should relate to what we actually see rather than what we like to see.

In his post GE shows another experiment using microwaves and standing waves. The wavefunction-psi is mapped by counting photons exactly as in the single photon DSE we have been looking at for some time.

Playing with the ripple tank ( http://www.echalk.co.uk/Science/Physics/ri...Tank/ripple.htm ) gives much the same patterns as the photon counts GE has shown .. we know photons don't interact (do we?) so each and every photon must somehow 'know' the steady state solution for a single frequency.

Once we have established what we are trying to explain things might start to get clearer .. or maybe not.

Hugely powerful lasers can be used to force air into a non-linear mode such that laser beams (photons) will interact .. as far as I know this is not possible in a vacuum. Smart optical materials can be used to give some very odd photon effects. This is why I think it would be best to consider a low power experiment using ordinary materials. Any reflections can be reduced to practically zero by the application of black paint to the offending item. The accuracy with which the results agree with theory suggest that reflections are not a problem.

Hopefully we may agree that the DSE we have discussed in some detail does not contain any exotic materials and the effect does not rely on the presence of such materials.

The Michaelson-Morley experiment would have detected 'memory' in space .. it didn't .. so within the limits of accuracy of the MM perhaps we can discard 'space memory' as a possible explanation?

Best wishes,

C2.

Hi Confused2,

OK I agree... You still have not explained why the "ripple tank" (applet) shows "progressive" ripples for a dual slit experiment which would result in "continuous illumination" of the fields as opposed to the actual EM case where we have standing waves with the same pattern where these patterns are effectively "stopped" while our photon packet is "progresive". This is the crucial point. It must be explained.

It is not that "space" has memory... that is "absurd". It is also contrary to Special Relativity. It is that space is "harmonic". We live in "harmonic" space and these are "cavity excitations". These would lead naturally all the way up to "matter wave" frequencies. We can't see them but "IMHO they are there".

Cheers

This post has been edited by Good Elf on Nov 27 2006, 02:30 PM

Hi Good Elf,

I'm only trying to say what I see .. that the distribution of counts of the single photon DSE matches that of a ripple tank with continuous excitation at a single frequency. That is an observation not an explanation.

I regret that what I see does not explain the wavepacket you have described and the wavepacket you have described does not explain what I see. Sorry .

Best wishes,

-C2.

Hi good elf!
Thanks for remembering that link. (and me).
I didn’t know then and don’t know now if it helps the discussion.

There is a common point that has been mentioned/raised that should be investigated to see if there is a correlation.

How can you verify or rule out/discard the possibility that the chamber is "already excited"/has a 'memory' in space/ in "harmonic" space?
????By using different set ups/frequencies and seeing/finding the changes/variations????
jal

Good Elf and All,


GE

That agrees with my "model". We know that there are infrared photons
in the cavity and slit area even in a completely closed and dark environment.
They are radiated by ambient heat from atomic interactions of matter of fthe
chamber itself. IR energy exists everywhere in the universe, otherwise there
would be absolute zero temperature in any region where no energy exists.
Also, the slits are closely spaced cavities that are sensitive to their own
oscillating/radiating EM energy fields. This is a matter of geometry scaling. If you pass photons
thru slits that are 6 inches wide, there would be no observable interference
pattern generated because there would be no harmonic interaction between
the EM fields of the photons with the EM fields of the cavity walls.

The close spacing of the slit sidewalls, in the DSE, concentrates and amplifies the
EM field energy being radiated by the atoms that make up the matter of the slits.
I will call this harmonic localized ambient radiation. In order for any
interaction to occur between the EM energy of the slits and the EM energy of the
photons they must have some common harmonic frequency and phase relationship that
exists as some ratio between the EM energy waves. Otherwise, no EM field phasing
and no diffraction or harmonic interaction should occur.

I do disagree with your last statement. IMO, there is extra energy added to the
atoms of the cavity induced by the EM fields of the passing photons. I believe
that this added energy slightly displaces the cavity electrons from their normal
orbits which affects the normal ambient atomic oscillating frequency. When
the electrons are displaced from their normal orbits, they acquire potential energy.
As they fall back into their normal orbits, after the interacting EM fields separate,
the electrons "ring" as they realign to their orbits and the potential energy is
converted to kinetic energy. That ringing kinetic energy is amplified by the
geometry of the dual slit cavity, and is a harmonic of the frequency of the passing
photon that caused it.

If this were not the case the photons would always hit the target in nearly the
same spot. Additional added energy from the passing photons is changing the
harmonic oscillation enegy level of the cavities. This would explain why a
symmetrical interference pattern can be generated by a stream of individual
photons. Each photon is adding some energy component to the cavity which
affects the intensity of the cavity oscillations, which affects the mixing of the
signals of the cavity and the subsequent photons. Something is changing to
create a difference in the "trajectory" of each subsequent photon which yields
a scaling interference pattern. It has to be the energy in the cavity oscillaitions, which affects the harmonic mixing, IMO.

Comments, other alternative explanations welcome. Let's discuss it.

LL

This post has been edited by Laserlight on Nov 27 2006, 06:16 PM