h a l f b a k e r ySuperficial Intelligence
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
The photons are particles with a minute but existant electro-
magnetic field around them.
Waves are created when the photon fields from one slit
interact
with other fields of photons from the other streams exiting the
other slits, and move the photons off their course. But with a
single slit
they are leaving the slit as a stream of particles
without
interacting with any other particles to their side, and so reach
a
point and do not draw extra stripes.
Think of tiny magnets instead of the iron filings that show the
field.
Shooting them through a single slit, they stay in line. Opening
two
slits causes them to pan out. Is that so hard to understand?
Addendum:
The single stream is held in line by a helical formation of
spinning photons. The electromagnetic fields around each
photon are locked in a rotating cilinder directed forward
similar to what happens vertically in tornado physics or in air
and water turbulance. It holds as long as there is no
disturbance from adjacent parallel streams.
To check this in water waves, I would use pipes with water
exiting in such a formation and see how it behaved at a
distance before a single stream dissipated. Then would take
multiple pipes and see whether the helixes would break down
and turn into the equivalent of a single wave hitting multiple
slits.
Another experiment closely resembling my model would be to
shoot a stream of small spinning ball magnets from a single
pipe, and then shooting them from multiple parallel pipes.
Finally, I would check if my theory holds in the case of sending
these tiny spinning magnets on a board with a single slit and
with several slits. If the stream of magnets from a single slit
would create a single hit-area opposite the slit, I'm quite sure
that the multiple slits would cause a wave effect.
Lastly, I would check that there is no effect caused by the
multiple slits on the INCOMING particles. Which could enhance
or even be the cause of this phenomenon:
Particles directed at my slit being deflected off the tip and not
entering it will only affect particles from other slits, prior to or
after the slit. So with one slit these deflected particles have
no effect, but with more than one slit, the particles affect
each other causing waveform interaction patterns.
The elegant Mach Zehnder Interferometer experiment in the
two-door exit lecture series and book, could equally be easily
understood:
The facts:
Rout 1 RR: (half the photons): Reflected then Reflected.
Rout 2 TR: (half the photons): Transmitted then Reflected.
With a second Beam Splitter:
When the beams are passing through each other, neither beam
has any affect on the other, but when hitting a Beam
Separator:
1a (RR) - is continuing to D1 as expected.
1b (RR) - seems to continue to D1 instead of being deflected to
D2.
2a (TR) - is deflected to D1 as expected.
2b (TR) - seems to be deflected to D1 instead of continuing on
to D2.
The key to this would be to understand the "splitter". If there is
some pull between the particles like there is in streaming
water I could easily build a splitter pipe that when water
enters it from the side sends all the output one way, but when
receiving only water from one source splits the stream in two,
letting half continue straight on and half deflected to a pipe on
the side. Nothing mysterious here. It would simply be the
opposite of the Bernoulli effect.
Time Traveler's Handbook of 1001 Tense Formations.
https://hitchhikers...01_Tense_Formations
Required reading [8th of 7, Sep 22 2020]
Blitz Barbeque
Blitz_20Barbeque
An early attempt to try an HB idea in the "Real World" [8th of 7, Sep 23 2020]
[link]
|
| |
//Shooting them through a single slot, they stay in line.
Opening two slots causes them to pan out.// - so they know
before they leave how many slits there are? |
|
| |
[kdf] - yes, 'wave' and 'particle' are just models; they don't
really describe the physical reality |
|
| |
Actually there might only be one of them, capable of manifesting as both [kdf] and [hippo] ... |
|
| |
Are you sure that's grammatically correct ? |
|
| |
We suggest you consult Dr. Dan Streetmentioner's definitve work on the subject. |
|
| |
Sounds like someone just discovered the double slit experiment. |
|
| |
//How about it [hippo], do you recall ever being
me?//
No, I don't think so, but that doesn't prove
anything. It could be that I turn into [kdf] at the full
moon and post strange, other-worldly ideas and
annotations, eventually waking as [hippo], bathed in
sweat, with cracked, broken and bloody fingernails and
an acid taste in my mouth and a hazy, fleeting memory of
furious typing. If this is true then during these waking
hours the [hippo] part of my mind locks away these
disturbing and perverse [kdf] memories for its own
protection.
Or it could be the other way round -
i.e. I might be Mr Hyde, rather than Dr Jekyll |
|
| |
Edited my hand particling. |
|
| |
Schrodinger's cat "thought experiment" was meant to prove
how WRONG and absurd it is to think that the cat was in
some both-alive-and-dead at-the-same-time state. |
|
| |
He meant us to accept that the cat was alive till some point
in time, and dead only after that, and that it was only a
problem of our knowledge. (An autopsy for example could
give us some clues about how long the cat had been dead). |
|
| |
I am claiming that we can create the same effect of single
vs multiple
slits with water or tiny magnets. |
|
| |
(Sorry about the spelling mistale, English is my secondary
language. I knew: "I slit a sheet, a sheet I slit. And on the
slitted sheet I sit". So I thought that slits were about cutting
things
and slots were about openings. Professor Avraham Hochberg
in his Biochemistry course at the Hebrew U used to ask for
native english speakers to read aloud "Beta Pleated Sheet"
because, as he explained in Hebrew, he never gets which is
which correctly. ) |
|
| |
Some words of warning; previous attempts to prove out some apparently innocuous HB ideas in the "real world" have yielded varying results. |
|
| |
This sounds fairly harmless, mind. Hard to see any obvious way it's going to burn the lab down ... |
|
| |
And [pash], you've absolutely no need to worry that other bakers will use your spelling mistakes, limited command of English, or imperfect understanding of basic physics as an excuse to deride and humiliate you. |
|
| |
We don't need excuses; we do it as Standard Operating Procedure... |
|
| |
<Obligatory faux-Hispanic "Hwee doan' need no steenkeeng hexcuses" parodic misquote/> |
|
| |
Does the the skating bubble of coffee move in bound ways because the coffee surface, the field, is the environmental information of the cup? |
|
| |
“The philosopher Didactylos has summed up an alternative hypothesis as "Things just happen. What the hell".” |
|
| |
//Borg do it unanimously.// |
|
| |
While they're all busy getting it on, who's flying the
Cube? How do they get that many species to follow
the same libidic rhythm and timing? How do they
deal with trisexual species? How many nursing
facilities does it take to handle the huge population
increase afterwards? So many questions... |
|
| |
Two experiments that succeeded in my lab and prove the
point: |
|
| |
1. Take a rotating elastic rod strung through magnetic
beads, each bead set in opposing direction to the previous
bead, so they repell and stay distant from each other. The
rod is only elastic enough to allow "wave" movement, but
not for the magnets to pull each other. Rotate the beads
on the rods. Now do so for another rod. |
|
| |
a) Try pulling each
rod upwards (like when pulling a fish out of the water with
a fishing rod) and notice that the rod of beads, now
verticle, stays
in a straight line with the beads at first pulling together a
bit (during the initial pull) and then bouncing back and
forth in a wave movement, but staying in a straight line
one behind the other. |
|
| |
b) Now do the same experiment, bring up two rods, causing
a slight interaction between them. In order to keep the
interaction small, so that the rods don't pull and attach to
each other, try out different distances until the rods
don't pull enough to completely connect, but do effect the
magnets on the other rod. |
|
| |
Result explained simply: We have particles (the beads)
causing wave interference when interfering with each
other, but without a second interference behave as
"particles" moving in a straight line. |
|
| |
The strange part is that there is nothing strange about this,
and it is totally intuitive. Which is what I am trying to
suggest. |
|
| |
2. Two lasers each with a slit in front of it, in parallel to
each other will create a stripe interference on each of the
opposing walls even though there is only one stream of
light and only a single slit in each wall. Proof that there is
interference from one light stream on the other. |
|
| |
The other more advanced experiments I proposed in the
newly edited idea have not been tried, and I doubt that
they would fail. |
|
| |
No, in fact they sound like something [xen] would use on her Discerning Gentlemen Clients, for an additional fee. |
|
| |
To be fair to [pash], it's just another model; an interpretation of observed phenomena. It can be billiard balls, or pages of equations, but ultimately it's an attempt to describe something that's not directly observable at its fundamental level. |
|
| |
A good predictive model is the best that can be hoped for. |
|
| |
//A good predictive model is the best that can be hoped for.//
Some models are better than others and there is a lot of future. |
|
| |
Humans are still open to new really deep insight, other new branches of mathematics, new technology, and advancement in computer data processing. Well, advancement of ingenuity and imagination of the human mind in general. |
|
| |
Then again, I suppose something could be designed, refined, used and abused without knowing the underlying mechanics that makes the stuff do what it is doing so long as it does the necessary when called upon in the conditions needed. That spacetime grip drive people are proposing, comes to mind. |
|
| |