Double Slit Experiment

Hell has no fury - Like a women scorned.

violenceinheaven.jpg


Science is a bitch.

What would a free man do?


We could always settle this argument like gentlemen and scientists.


terrygiblindse.jpg



Here is the diagram of the experiment, which I have asked to carry out at the Cavendish Laboratory in Cambridge.

In your professional 'opinion' does it work?

A simple Yes or No?


Alpha, Omega - Be light made.

Light in, Light out.
 
You know, you keep posting that diagram, but do you also realise that nobody has any idea what it is supposed to mean?
 
funkstar said:
You know, you keep posting that diagram, but do you also realise that nobody has any idea what it is supposed to mean?
Click to expand...


I do...It means...Ummm....Well, you see... No, not a clue..

And, what's up with the angel pic?:confused:
 
CptBork said:
Why do you need Cavendish Laboratory to carry it out for you?
Click to expand...

Simple, to win and claim a Nobel Prize, they prefer if you can perform a repeatable experiment to prove your theory is correct.

I said and asked,

Terry Giblin said:
Dear Alpha(N),

We could always settle this argument like gentlemen and scientists.


terrygiblindse.jpg



Here is the diagram of the experiment, which I have asked to carry out at the Cavendish Laboratory in Cambridge.

In your professional 'opinion' does it work?

A simple Yes or No?

Alpha, Omega - Be light made.

Light in, Light out.
Click to expand...

And Alpha(Nob) reply was,

AlphaNumeric said:
No.
Click to expand...

And he has the nerve to call himself a 'Physicist'.

I thought he was just being awkward, when he kept asking what I meant by a 'quantum barrier' or a 'quantum well', but its true he doesn't have a clue.

He has never studied Physics.

So for his benefit, here is a quick Physics lesson.

Quantum Tunneling for dummies

Quantum Tunneling for mathematicians

The infamous Double slit experiment

Now image what happens if we combine both experiments.

Placing the electron's behind the 'quantum barrier' does not change the experiment, you still get an interference pattern.

Anything from a black hole to an electron will eventual quantum tunnel through, pass through the double slits to form an interference pattern.

But the whole purpose of my version of the experiment, is to stop everyone thinking that we are starting with a 'particle electron'. How does a 'particle electron' go through both slits at the same time. It doesn't because in my version of the experiment, I do not use 'particle electrons' I use 'quantum electrons'.

For the past several decades Physicists have tried various methods to modify the Double slit experiment, to see if they could beat nature, but all have failed.

Mine is the first real successful attempt to modify and solve the experiment, without changing the experiment.

Starting with a 'particle electron' when it passes through the 'quantum barrier' it is no longer a 'particle electron' but instead now has a simple probability, or 'probability wave function' of existing beyond the 'quantum barrier', which propagates through both slits. Its 'wave function' only collapses at the screen, when it is observed.

Do you still think my experiment does not work?

Alpha, Omega - Be light made.

Light in, Light out.
 
Terry Giblin said:
And he has the nerve to call himself a 'Physicist'.
Click to expand...
I've got more of a physics education than you.

You're doing the same as Farsight, you find out I did a maths degree and suddenly its "You're not a physicist!". Anyone whose done a physics degree should know how much mathematics there are in it and in terms of topics there's a great deal of cross over between physics and applied mathematics. In fact most universities have their general relativity department in their maths department. Cambridge has their theoretical physics department in their maths department. Its in the name of the department Terry, DAMTP = Department of applied mathematics and theoretical physics.

In fact friends of mine who did the Cambridge physics degree had to spend the 1st year of their PhD doing material I'd already done in my maths degree, like quantum field theory and string theory. I went straight into research.

Clearly you haven't bothered to check your facts before hand, you're just so desperate to throw out the "You're not a physicist, you're a mathematician!" insult. Or rather an attempt at an insult, since I personally think my more mathematical background put me in a much better position to do theoretical physics than people who had a more practical physics background. Anyone who looks at the theoretical physics section of www.arxiv.org will see how mathematical it is. I didn't spend any time in a lab during my degree and it wasn't a hinderance when going theoretical physics. If I'd gone into solid state optical physics, which I had a PhD offer for also, then I'd have wished I'd done more experiments but I didn't.

Yes, I don't have a physics degree, I have a mathematics one. I'm still a trillion times the physicist that you are Terry. Must be annoying to have done less physics than a lowly mathematician ;)
Terry Giblin said:
I thought he was just being awkward, when he kept asking what I meant by a 'quantum barrier' or a 'quantum well', but its true he doesn't have a clue.

He has never studied Physics.
Click to expand...
Are you really this daft? You just went to DAMTP to try to talk to people about your work (harass more like) and you know I studied in that very department for 4 years and yet you're trying to claim I didn't study the relevant material? You can't simultaneously say DAMTP has the relevant people in it and then claim that I didn't study the relevant material when I was there.

As I said, I've taught quantum mechanics. I might not have been in a physics department for my degree but I was for my PhD. The fact you're saying this and yet you have just found out who I am and where I did my PhD suggests you're desperate to lie about me, even when you know differently. Didn't you bother to look at the url you PM'd to me? It's in the physics department.

I never asked you "Whats a quantum well" in the sense of "I don't know what that is" but in the sense of "Do you know what it is". Which you don't.

Terry Giblin said:
Mine is the first real successful attempt to modify and solve the experiment, without changing the experiment.
Click to expand...
You haven't done the experiment so claiming its a success before you've done it is a little premature.
 
Dear Alpha(Nob),

I am not going to argue with you any more. I should have simply ignored you from the beginning, its when you got personal I did not like.

For the past 5 years all you have done is attacked me personally and the more I have defended myself the more you have attacked.

Everything I say you twist around and use it against me.

I know who you are now, I have a list of your references and I know who your Prof of fluid dynamics is. I am going to contact them and make sure they know what you do in your spare time and how you treat innocent people.

All you have done, for the past 5 years, is bring shame and dishonour to your family name and every institution you represent.

I am pleased to say that you are the exception, not the norm. Which is probably why you are no longer in academia.

Alpha, Omega - Be light made.

Light in, Light out.
 
I guess you just showed what kind of a person you really are Terry. How sad you have to blame other people for your own short comings and failures. You couldn't present a single iota of coherent argument so instead you have to sink to what is basically harassment. Well done, your actions are a complete vindication of what I've said about your lack of reason and argument.
 
Terry Giblin said:
Simple, to win and claim a Nobel Prize, they prefer if you can perform a repeatable experiment to prove your theory is correct.

I said and asked...
Click to expand...


Terry Giblin said:
And Alpha(Nob) reply was...
Click to expand...

Terry Giblin said:
And he has the nerve to call himself a 'Physicist'.
Click to expand...

Well if you can tell us whether or not the following experiment works, maybe we'd be able to help you out with yours.

picture.php

Have a shot, if you think your experiment is superior then please tell me what's wrong with mine, and in what ways yours is better.
 
Alpha N

You might "know" math and you might "know" physics, but you struggle with life. You asserting your dominance does little to help your "reputation" despite what "drivel" Mr. Giblin displays. Science is man's interpretation of the universe and man is indefinitely part of that science. Until you know man you will never fully understand physics. "knowledge" is your friend, but when it comes to man you have no "imagination", no encouragement, no "faith" in your fellow man. You are the supreme being of understanding in this universe you have made for yourself. Ranting about your achievements does little to aid your case against Giblin. You fail to "observe" many actions as you peer through your slits maybe you should take a step back and peer through them at another angle, but I doubt that would help your cause or change the effects.
 
Science is man's interpretation of the universe and man is indefinitely part of that science. Until you know man you will never fully understand physics
Click to expand...

Liberal Arts major, aren't you?
 
If this is your definition of liberal arts then possibly.

"The aim of liberal education is to create persons who have the ability and the disposition to try to reach agreements on matters of fact, theory, and actions through rational discussions." "The Aim of Liberal Education," DiText, September 1, 2003."http://www.ditext.com/libed/libed.html

Otherwise you better guess again.
 
Yep, liberal arts major.

Did you have any physics course, other than intro in your first year?
 
If you are asking If I fully understand Newton's principals, Einstein's thought experiments, the laws of thermodynamics, string theory, the theory of everything, or (gasping at unrealistic probability) the uncertainty principal. I could ask you the same thing couldn't I?
 
No, I think I asked if you had taken any intermediate or advanced physics courses.
 
You expect me to answer after you first insult my intelligence, only after you fail to understand the point of my tirade against your friend was not to uphold the drivel that Mr. Giblin undoubtedly spills out. "THAT" information is a given. I ask are you Alpha's proxy or is he yours?
 
I did answer your question. I said "THAT" information is "a given". Perhaps you as well need to take a step back or join me on a different discussion. I do however "enjoy" when you lead with your velocity. It gets you a little further from me. take "THAT" for what you will.
 
chaos1956 said:
I did answer your question. I said "THAT" information is "a given".
Click to expand...

You mean that it's a given that you're a Liberal Arts major who has never taken any physics course other than Intro To in your freshman year.
 
AlexG said:
You mean that it's a given that you're a Liberal Arts major who has never taken any physics course other than Intro To in your freshman year.
Click to expand...

I don't want to take sides in this dispute you're having with chaos (not yet at least), but your mention of "Intro To" kinda reminded me of the planets, stars and galaxies course my department gives to arts students... one of my profs calls it "Rocks in Space" :roflmao:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top