Problem with the two slit experiment, Observing later

GE,



You are correct; and I should have used my own terms to describe the similarities between the "entanglement", and "coherence" terms in Physics.


Both of these superpositions can be described by the classical sound wave analogy on Resonance between a ensemble of oscillators, each having its own characteristic frequency. Entanglement describes the separation of coherent energy, and the "link" that sustains their "beat-free" Resonance, until one of the parts is "absorbed" (by an equal, or resonant energy). Coherence describes the interactions between beat-free, and "all beats", which measures at the 1/2 wave. This is then repeated in a symmetrically dualistic opposite (phase).

This is compatible with the angle measuring method, and the 90 & 180 degree points of the sine-wave. This has been described as "constructive" and "destructive", but these terms are misleading. Both of these terms are relative to the frame of reference of the "sender", and not "stand alone" reactions.


GE has explained the event very well. I just have slightly different assumptions. As I said about the SSE, there is no point using something "new", if it doesn't improve the explanation. This is the case here as well. It is easier, and has a correct answer, to limit the calculation to "1 frequency", even though, I have established the presence of "more than 1 frequency" at several different "weak" QM assumption points.

I included a link on "interference filters", as well as the notch and line filters.
The thing is, if you describe the "interference filter" as a new cavity within the measurement system, then you must allow for the interactions of the "photons" within said cavity, following interference rules. I though that was against the GE model?

When I asked "is the filter a NEW source of photons, or a CHANGE in energy of the original photons", it was semi-rhetorical. It is a question directed at our (QM) assumptions of what a filter is doing. It is my understanding, that standard QM says that all energy transactions take place through the absorption and emission process. Transparency is an illusion that stems from our limited visual frequency reception. All things are transparent (100% Resonant) to SOME frequency.

The colors of the filters are for very definite reasons, and they are not based on "marketing", or "popularity". The interactions that take place in these filters is "perfectly timed" to cause an outside observer to see a "passing through" of the wave, with a loss in velocity (within the medium), and a minimal amount of angle change. The frequencies, or colors, that are not "perfectly timed" are absorbed, and transmitted at other angles (in the lattice, or reflected), that do not allow a "continuance" in the same direction.

http://www.semrock.com/publishings/11704_S...opy_Reprint.pdf

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


I think that we should go back a little further into the history too. I want to describe this ENERGY, and how it interacts with MATTER, with tools that are designed NOT for "large, statistical quantities", but rather, for small groups, or ensembles of oscillators.


regards,

T.Roc



This post has been edited by TRoc on Dec 13 2006, 06:00 AM

Hi again!


For YQ, Jal, THEY, and (I'm sure,) others too. I think that it is fair to "throw a bone out", in order to justify listening to my argument.


YQ

A few weeks back, YQ and I were talking about the Higgs search, and I thought a "prediction" would be a good way to show this, even though it would be quite some time away before we would know the results.

Me (to YQ)

YQ (answers)

Me (clearing up numbers)

and finally, (me)

When I looked at my Resonance Matrix, the values that the Higgs boson are expected to be found at are very "crowded". What this ultimately means, in the context of making a "prediction", was it wouldn't be very "predictive", because I would have to give 15 or 20 values (nodes) where it could be found.

The comment about "on the easy side" was about the section before the elements, where things are not so crowded. It wouldn't take so many numbers, making it a much better prediction.

HAD I KNOWN that Science was going to discover a new particle, less than 1 month after this conversation with YQ, I would have definitely gave some values for these "blank" spaces, or unoccupied Nodes on the R.Matrix, near the neutrinos. Oh, well ! Hindsight! I can, at least calculate the peaks where they found the axion. It has not been confirmed by peers yet, so maybe some refinements will come in, or even disagreements. (note: this is not the same as the also searched for "solar axions" that CERN is looking for)


http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/long-the-fi...ound-12137.html December 2006

The axion peaks: 7 and 19 MeV

7 MeV = 1.69259e21 Hz = Z * R^846 = 1.714e21 Hz

19 MeV = 4.59417e21 Hz = Z * R^863 = 4.5763e21 Hz

line up with my "expectation frequencies", or resonant Nodes. Right "in the neighborhood" is the tau neutrino: (where I suggested)

<15.5 MeV = 3.7478e21 Hz = Z^2 * R^859 =3.7292e21 Hz


For those paying attention, you'll note that the axion got one Z interaction, while the neutrino got the square (Z^2). The "physical" interpretation here (IMO) is the "recoil and impact" values that the Universe contributes to measurements (the ZPE, or HV ?) and is also explained by HUP, and the interference of the "observer". The axion (and W & Z bosons), along with other "fading" resonances, do not receive this "energy" (force?) twice, as do all the stable resonances. This can also be looked at geometrically with my hypothesis of "triangulation" (having 3 points, enclosing space), which would be a "spontaneous virtual cavity" where stability arises. The short lived resonances never reach this "cavitation".

This last paragraph is conjecture, which I am faced with doing in trying to interpret the math that so easily, and naturally produces the frequencies of the Standard Model, and the Table of Elements (all Isotopes, actually). This is on top of "predicting" the visible spectrum (frequencies AND wavelength AND c) from ONE number, and for "predicting" a causal, mathematical explanation for musical chords (Resonance). These last two might seem "quaint" to the Physicist, but, since they were the basis of SENSE-ABLE phenomenon that led to the discovery of the same pattern for the "masses", they can not be seen as trivial.


Just in my own defense, asking me (from my theory) for predictions is a little bit strange. The "validity" is already established by the total number of predictions it's already made. Has QM (or any Physics) "predicted" any of these "fundamental" masses, or energy levels? Was QM able to "predict" the "weird outcomes" of the DSE BEFORE they were seen? It seems that the explanations have all come after the fact, and after manipulation, normalization, and reformulating the theory, every time some new data didn't agree with what LITTLE they did try to predict. Even their "probabilities" are not proper statistics (odds don't mingle, ask a bookie).


best regards,

T.Roc



This post has been edited by TRoc on Dec 13 2006, 10:16 AM

Hi TRoc...

Start with just one oscillator..

Best wishes, C2.

C2,


My best guess (for what you're asking) :

The Universe,

with a "frequency" of 1.0267092999.. ( Z )

better thought of as a rate, 2.67% of the energy being "measured". (at each electron)

Then, with "one spin", or cycle, the 1st harmonic = 2.0534185998..

On the "way" to this harmonic, a "quantized angular momentum", of 12 exponentially scaled parts (ratios). (1.0594630943592952645618252949463 multiplied for every "step") ( R )


Keep in mind, this is a mathematical "pattern". The physical explanations are still being determined in most cases.


ciao,

T.Roc

Hi TRoc,

Noooo... !!!! Not the whole universe!

Something very simple ... any oscillator resonant at a frequency of say 'f'' .

That would mean it absorbs frequency 'f' and having done so it can radiate a frequency 'f' ?

I think Good Elf is an expert in this area so perhaps he can help to clarify how much energy would be associated with a frequency 'f'..

Obviously there is a trap (QM) being set here .. interesting to see what happens next.

Best wishes,

-C2.

Hi TRoc et al,

Probably what we all like
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_oscillator

---------------------------------------

The maths in the next one looks a bit daunting (to me) but just reading the text gives an idea about where these guys are coming from. It should be possible to read it without losing your soul to QM..

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/quant-ph/pdf/0503/0503109.pdf

If we looked at an oscillator of energy E we might feel driven to conclude that there is some physical meaning to the f given by E = hf . It gets more interesting when we consider a system that has states (for want of a better word) E0,E1,E2,En .. in changing from state En to Em we'd get a frequency f = (En-Em)/h which (by any standards) was never physically present in the system. New frequencies! ... not (unfortunately) harmonically related** but at least they are there.

I hope that this has been of some interest.

Best wishes,

-C2.

** (Edit) .. on second reading ??

This post has been edited by Confused2 on Dec 13 2006, 03:03 PM

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

Lets examine what "superposition" really means...

So the superposition of the states is related to the infinite number of ways in which a particle may negotiate a cavity. Note very Carefully: One path one possible interference pattern from an infinity of possible coexisting simultaneous states. These patterns "exist" in a cavity even when there is no photons or particles in the Cavity, they are "built in" and are the basic geometry. Just like when you build a church organ... the pipes are built to exacting specifications to fabricate the cavity that will be "excited" when we want music. Until you excite the cavity there is no music.

While in our "real world" we are not as exacting in our "transactions" the Universe will insist on "exactness" and these possible modes are all possible ways the "haphazard" cavity of our Universe can be traversed. In a more complex way the Universe is a series of cavities where the "pipes" may be 'equivalent" to all the objects we find in our world and their spatial positions at all points in time. The "event", which is a photon, "sees" just one of these states from the point of view of the photon's starting position and it's finishing position. These elements it already knows in advance through "resonance" along "a short path in our Universe", in higher dimensions. We have discussed this before with the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment... the sub-topic of this thread.

When you introduce the photon at a particular wavelength or frequency it "sees" the cavity as a standing wave pattern that exists "always" for that one photon event. It can be considered as "information about the cavity" rather than information about photons. Many photons in the one boson state can occupy that one state in the cavity and they expand in it at the speed of light (they spread). In the case of photons there may be many ways the photon may negotiate a cavity and provided the cavity is perfectly reflecting it will execute all "possible" paths. see Zephir's Animation.



These eigenstates are the stationary solutions for the harmonic oscillator in a cavity ... the Schroedinger wave Equation. The "solutions" for the cavity do not involve the photon itself but is only a way of describing the state independent of any specific photon. The cavity can be any cavity but in particular it is the cavity of our Universe and the arrangements of all the particles in it right down to the sub-atomic orbital cavities. A particular photon does not need to negotiate the entire cavity of the Universe but will negotiate a part of the cavity in the time the photon or particle is in that quantum state. The simplest state is when the cavity resonates and the photon revisits the same positions and places at equal intervals. In general it is far more complex than this.

Then we have the "collapse of the state" when we finally discover just which state we are measuring. We can only measure "populated states"... states where we somehow know there are photons present. In this sense we simply truncate the state in time. What is really happening is that we are suppressing the "wave function" outside the period when the wave was collapsed. This is the Wheeler-Feynman Emitter-Absorber Theory. The rest of the state still exists "somewhere" but it's effect is masked in the same way that a node masks the effect of a particle in a cavity. So the state can still "emerge" if conditions allow it somewhere else as an "anti-node".

When Yquantum said of the issue "the truth be known nothing that I have read, has been looked at before by non-professional and professionals in the field of optics". He was dead right. What I am actually saying is "everything is pure optics" and nothing else.

One of the prime predictions I can make of this theory is since everything is "optics" then all the forces of the Universe are expressions of optics in various realms. That this implies that gravity itself and even the property of mass are the effects of matter wave optics... and of lower dimensional holograms and the way they interact as "matter waves" in "synthetic" higher dimensions.

Nobody since Einstein has suggested that Gravity is a pseudo-force and relates to "optical distortion" and that it is ultimately "electromagnetic" in origin. The symmetry of gravity is "symmetric" while the symmetry of electromagnetism is "anti-symmetric". The particle theories all use a mix of "gravitons" or a separate force altogether that 'seeps" through dimensional space or Planck Length scale Phenomena (each one has shortcomings). Will the Higgs allow any practical understanding of the "force" that confers mass? It is very problematic as Yquantum has said. The way things are proceeding the best that can be said is we have a working theory of Gravity that is based on geometry and curved Spacetime and quantization of this has failed. If electromagnetism is the answer to mass then this provides an optical solution to gravity as a purely optical phenomena. Clearly the forces of electromagnetism and the force of gravity are related by a factor of about 10^40... that is electromagnetism is 10 raised to the power of 40 times stronger than gravity. This is unexpected by current theory. However this conversion cannot be realized within three dimensions and time but must be widened to include more dimensions. In those extra dimensions the lower dimensional gravity will have anti-symmetric components whose inner product is symmetric. There are some strong ideas behind this... Light travels at the speed of Gravity (at least it seems that way). Light is bent by gravity even though it has no mass... this signifies that mass is not the criterion by which gravity operates but is related to a more primitive "optics". There are significant differences between the behavior of light and the behavior of gravity and that is the most serious source of objection, however much of this objection is from the perspective of only 4D spacetime. A widened perspective would allow for these symmetry differences. Charge in higher dimensions is an expression of topology... in other words pure geometry.

On a totally separate point... Jal has mistaken my attempt to clarify the nature of interference. Quotes should be actual quotes Jal and not ad-libs of what I am trying to say. The intersection of a sphere and a plane is a circle... that is all I wanted to say. The expanding sphere of a spherically symmetric wavefront of light describes ever larger circles on the plane... at one specific point in time the plate becomes "transparent" to the light when it no longer cancels but reinforces on the way through. This occurs at the position of an Airy Disk.

Cheers

Hi Duality, jal, Confused2, TRoc, Laserlight, Good Elf, et al,

Good Elf, hope all is well!

I am not able to read all that has been posted, I see my pseudo name on occasion But, all I ask is please do not use my name in vain-joke, you can do as you please if I said it I will stand behind the words or else confess I have made a mistake.

I read your post, Good Elf it takes a entire tea break to think it through. But one of the problems I have in your statement;

Your real world is not the world in which you live, you should know this just studying the DSE.

And when everyone uses 10^n power - or +, no one including myself truly understands how large or small this is or comprehends the significance of such a number on the forces. That is the world you live in. And why classical thinking will not explain it. Superposition is the language of QM, and that is what we have to live with until a better model is developed. I did not create this, it is just the way QM works.

Yes, we need a new model, but please understand you will not find it in classical thinking.

I was consumed in the Higgs, now I just hope we have the intelligence to see if we can define or explain supersymmetry which offers a way to unify the two big classes of particles, the bosons and the fermions, which if you look deep into the well you should find a superpartner but this is going to be tricky.That was for TRoc.

I truly wish you all the best, but how you will accomplish this task is going to be formidable at best.

ciao_
yquantum

Duality, jal, Confused2, TRoc, Laserlight, Good Elf, I know this post will be in good hands and keep up the discussion, it is not who is right or wrong but how can it be solved would be my goal if I could be apart of this great post.

This post has been edited by yquantum on Dec 13 2006, 04:53 PM

Good day Everyone!
A few comments for Good Elf
I hope that I get the quotes right.

We have not detected these patterns.
This is my model in your words. I show how the pattern is put together.
I'm waiting for the results from CERN.
Total quote

my post

It appears that what we see is what you have interpreted. A wave = a sphere expanding at 1/R^2 and that the only time that it intersect the plane is when the radius equals an interger number of wavelengths. Not when the sphere is at an interger number of 1/R^2. If an electron is not positioned at the right place (in the plane) to intercept the interger number of wavelengths it does not make any difference. That plane, at the micro level, would have elevations differences that would make Mount Everest look small.
So since we are dealing with interger number of wavelengths we do not need to have 1/R^2 in the interpretation. The destructive interference pattern has nothing to do with 1/R^2. It is due to the wavelengths.
You think wave ... you think bubbles .... I don't ... I think spin.

I am pointing out that the "expanding sphere" is not needed for your explanation.
If you think about it an "expanding sphere" would always hit Mount Everett and never make a circular pattern.
jal
Hi yquantum just saw your post.

Wow that blows my mind. I don't have an answer but i wana see alot of replys to this. thats amazing

Hi Jal,

I don't think I mentioned Mt. Everest. I was referring to a expanding sphere and a plane. Thats is all. The intersection is a circle. If the plane contains a special interference filter then every now and again this "light" that is "progressively" illuminating the "plane" will reinforce through the interference filter and and "pass"... everywhere else the interference filter destructively interferes with the light (of that one wavelength of 702nm) and "blocks". This "pinhole" illuminates the backplane of the camera in the image of a circle as it continues to "spread". The supplied image indicates this with the addition of double refraction (birefringence) like in an Iceland Spar Crystal and the Interference Filter (not shown). Those who have worked in crystallography will understand what I mean by this.

Click to enlarge. This is not my image but the one supplied with the experiment. The diverging cones and the E and O rays are explicitly described there. Open "secret".
http://departments.colgate.edu/physics/res...aratus/spdc.htm


Cheers

This post has been edited by Good Elf on Dec 13 2006, 05:27 PM

Good Elf

So am I. The expanding sphere will always hit the closest point and collapse at that point. (Mount Everett ) You will never get a circle.
The circle is only made by many many photons. Not "Expanding spheres" of many many photons.
jal

Jal,

Consider how energy radiates from a dipole antenna. It is a focused spherical
or conical wavefront (energy lobe) with the highest power point always in the center of the lobe and dropping off along extreme the boundaries of the lobe.


From Wikipedia:



LL

This post has been edited by Laserlight on Dec 13 2006, 06:12 PM

All,

yq, I do not think the strange world of quantum mechanics is digestible, I cannot blame them much, but the "Emperor Has No Clothes" story. ... notice that the Emperor had no clothes on (classical thinking).

He was not infected with the blindness ... did not seem to mind.

Duality/Lisa

This post has been edited by Duality on Dec 13 2006, 06:42 PM

Duality
Stay with the program.
Explain how "expanding bubbles" of photons can get past Mount Everett and light up a circle of electrons.
Open my eyes so that I can see.
jal