Feynman Double Slit
- Thread starter dav57
- Start date
chirality:
I am glad you apparently finally found out how to pull up Wikipedia on your screen. Keep trying! Who knows what else is available that would be just right for you!
I would genuinely enjoy participating in the arguement you are trying to start, for the same reason that Mickey Mantle genuinely enjoyed batting against knuckleball pitchers: he had such good eyesight and reflexes that a knuckleball was the easiest pitch for him to hit, and he was so strong that he did not need the wimpy slow speed of the pitch to provide any of the momentum. He hit his longest home runs off of knucklers. The fact is that I have work to do, work of even more importance than engaging in a pointless arguement with someone like you.
However, I do take it as a compliment that you gave it your best effort to bait me, even going to the extent of transparently lying about my statements in my posts. I must call you a real master baiter.
I am glad you apparently finally found out how to pull up Wikipedia on your screen. Keep trying! Who knows what else is available that would be just right for you!
I would genuinely enjoy participating in the arguement you are trying to start, for the same reason that Mickey Mantle genuinely enjoyed batting against knuckleball pitchers: he had such good eyesight and reflexes that a knuckleball was the easiest pitch for him to hit, and he was so strong that he did not need the wimpy slow speed of the pitch to provide any of the momentum. He hit his longest home runs off of knucklers. The fact is that I have work to do, work of even more importance than engaging in a pointless arguement with someone like you.
However, I do take it as a compliment that you gave it your best effort to bait me, even going to the extent of transparently lying about my statements in my posts. I must call you a real master baiter.
Last edited:
Mosheh Thezion
Registered Senior Member
the electron...
its a particle on monday, wedsnday and friday...
but its a wave on tuesday, thursday and saturday...
on sunday it rests.
-MT
its a particle on monday, wedsnday and friday...
but its a wave on tuesday, thursday and saturday...
on sunday it rests.
-MT
Quantum interactions are considered to ubiquitously conserve momentum and kinetic energy, measured before and after the complete interaction.
However, during the interaction there are moments when such are indeterminate, permitting the weird non-classical results.
When the dust settles, the momentum and kinetic energy books have to be in balance.
Quantum physics don't want no embezzling 'round here.
However, during the interaction there are moments when such are indeterminate, permitting the weird non-classical results.
When the dust settles, the momentum and kinetic energy books have to be in balance.
Quantum physics don't want no embezzling 'round here.
geistkiesel
Valued Senior Member
Dav5, here is a model to chew on.dav57 said:
This is an unpublished version.
To be very brief, JS Bell made the point that any qm model that did not ecplicitly include nonlocal forces was incomplete (See 'speakable and unspeakable in qm', a collection of papers on the subject by JS Bell). Unlike the current or standard model,the following is not as spooky. Once the electron is looked as a 'spin particle', with two possible modes, up or down , plus- minus, etc, one does not have to invoke a wave-particle duality to the electron just to get it through two holes simultaneous. If the mass of the electron goes through one hgole and the 'nonlocal spin mode', element of the spin state goes through the other hole, then the so-called wave interference effects will be observed, otherwise the electron distribution on the scintillating screen is 'gaussian'.
Feynman, in discussing the impossibility of a different mode (Vol III 'Lectures on Physics', Chapter 1), than that adopted mode, he comments that "otherwise the electron would have to know ahead of time which hole it was going to traverse".(paraphrasing a bit). This should have been looked at a little closer as this is what apparently occurs.
The electron is made up of a massive 'core' and a charge field surrounding the mass. Without giving any attributes other than a general descrtiption of 'mass' consider the electron as it approaches the holes. The charge field -precedes the electron's arrival at trhe surface contqaining the holes., and the electron therefore finds its forward motion impeded by the reflected charge dirsrtribution from the surface of the material containing the holes. The impeded motion wil occur over the whole of the surface with the exception that there will be no reflection (or certainly a reduced reflection from those points defining the holes). Therefore the electron will take the path of least resistant, or minimum potential trajectory and enter one of the holes. The observed 'spin vector' is assumed located internally to the electron, yet the spin mode not actualized is relegated to a 'nonlocal status'. This assumes the electron has a dynamic +-+-+- switching mechanism operating until polarized by the inhomogeneous magnetic field as defined in Stern-Gerlach experiments. The changing charge field distribution in space of the electron during the reflection process creates the condition for an inhomogeneous magnetic field that effectively provides an 'equivalent' magnetic field volume seen in more controlled Stern-Gerlach conditions. There is no ambiguity regarding a 'nonlocal' entitiy being localized in the other hole during transition through the holes, as this polarizing condition localizes the nonlocal elements at least during the transition through the holes (this is also the case in transitioning particles, spin-1 included, seen in Stern-Gerlach experimental results, or during transition through the inhomogeneous magnetic volume of the Stern-Gerlach segment. In other words, if nonlocal elements have a real affect on the particle, there must be a local-nonlocal interface appearing under certain conditions at some instant of time(s).
Geistkiesel
geistkiesel
Valued Senior Member
Dav57, here is a model to chew on.dav57 said:
This is an unpublished version.
To be very brief, JS Bell made the point that any qm model that did not ecplicitly include nonlocal forces was incomplete (See 'speakable and unspeakable in qm', a collection of papers on the subject by JS Bell). Unlike the current or standard model,the following is not as spooky. Once the electron is looked as a 'spin particle', with two possible modes, up or down , plus- minus, etc, one does not have to invoke a wave-particle duality to the electron just to get it through two holes simultaneous. If the mass of the electron goes through one hgole and the 'nonlocal spin mode', element of the spin state goes through the other hole, then the so-called wave interference effects will be observed, otherwise the electron distribution on the scintillating screen is 'gaussian'.
Feynman, in discussing the impossibility of a different mode (Vol III 'Lectures on Physics', Chapter 1), than that adopted mode, he comments that "otherwise the electron would have to know ahead of time which hole it was going to traverse".(paraphrasing a bit). This should have been looked at a little closer as this is what apparently occurs.
The electron is made up of a massive 'core' and a charge field surrounding the mass. Without giving any attributes other than a general descrtiption of 'mass' consider the electron as it approaches the holes. The charge field -precedes the electron's arrival at trhe surface contqaining the holes., and the electron therefore finds its forward motion impeded by the reflected charge dirsrtribution from the surface of the material containing the holes. The impeded motion wil occur over the whole of the surface with the exception that there will be no reflection (or certainly a reduced reflection from those points defining the holes). Therefore the electron will take the path of least resistant, or minimum potential trajectory and enter one of the holes. The observed 'spin vector' is assumed located internally to the electron, yet the spin mode not actualized is relegated to a 'nonlocal status'. This assumes the electron has a dynamic +-+-+- switching mechanism operating until polarized by the inhomogeneous magnetic field as defined in Stern-Gerlach experiments. The changing charge field distribution in space of the electron during the reflection process creates the condition for an inhomogeneous magnetic field that effectively provides an 'equivalent' magnetic field volume seen in more controlled Stern-Gerlach conditions. There is no ambiguity regarding a 'nonlocal' entitiy being localized in the other hole during transition through the holes, as this polarizing condition localizes the nonlocal elements at least during the transition through the holes (this is also the case in transitioning particles, spin-1 included, seen in Stern-Gerlach experimental results, or during transition through the inhomogeneous magnetic volume of the Stern-Gerlach segment. In other words, if nonlocal elements have a real affect on the particle, there must be a local-nonlocal interface appearing under certain conditions at some instant of time(s).
Geistkiesel
Dearest Cangus,
I must say, it’s really too bad you don’t engage in any of these "pointless arguments." Who knows, you might actually learn something. Although, I guess the use of a baseball analogy is a sure bet when someone throws the book at you.
Point. Set. Match.
ps. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis
I must say, it’s really too bad you don’t engage in any of these "pointless arguments." Who knows, you might actually learn something. Although, I guess the use of a baseball analogy is a sure bet when someone throws the book at you.
Point. Set. Match.
ps. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis
geistkiesel
Valued Senior Member
Try Feynman's 'Lectures on Physics" Vol III frimarily. The books are in the range of $65, so a library would be a good first look. Chapter one Vol Ill RF starts with some very basic stuff.CANGAS said:
Geistkiesel
chirality:
Cangus it is spelled not.
CANGAS correct it is.
Too difficult for you it is?
PS: You are apparently deliberately misrepresenting my statement to you. Not a surprise. I was speaking of your specific attempted arguement as being obviously pointless. What is it that you are so hot to teach me?
Cangus it is spelled not.
CANGAS correct it is.
Too difficult for you it is?
PS: You are apparently deliberately misrepresenting my statement to you. Not a surprise. I was speaking of your specific attempted arguement as being obviously pointless. What is it that you are so hot to teach me?
Last edited:
geistkiesel
Valued Senior Member
2inq, excuse the buttinsky, as your question was directed elsewhere, but your question points to a tragic failure in quantum mechanical theory.2inquisitive said:
By using an ad hoc wave-particle model the problem of how one electron passes through two holes was put to rest. You are correct, measuring both holes after trasmission of the electron, only one hole will be found to have been used. Therefore, the wave nature of the electron does not provide a rational explanation.
When we look at the probelm, what must be a rational conclusion? Who a rational conslusion be that: there are elements, attributes of the electron that are not are not observed, or have remained unobserved that are, however an intrinsic part of the electron? What could be the nature of these unobserved elements, that while unobserved (or to rephrase: nonlocal) are however critical an d intrinsic elements of the electron structure.
What experoimental results is there , beside the two-hole diffraction results that might cast some light?
In Stern-Gerlach transition experiments a spin-1/2 particle, such as the electron, will, upon entering the inhomogeneopus magnetic field oriented floor to ceiling (bottom to top, - to +), will develop either a + or - component along the z-axis (down to up). Spin-1 particles will exhibit the same characteristics, with an added third trajectory as a possibility, of continuing in a more or less straight line trajectory.
The characteristics are not seen in other asepcts of the structure of the particles.
Another generalized example: A transition of the state of a particle, perhaps the electron, goes as : S -> T -> S. The particle enters the Stern-Gerlach segment as an S state particle, is changed into one of an allowed states , T, in the T segment, and upon leaving reverts, reforms, back into the 0original state S. S is generic and could be +S or -S, T can be +T or -T.
From the S-> T -> S we can see that there must be some retained information in the T state that is drawn upon by the particle when exiting the field in the T segment, otherwise it would have remained in the T state, or have evovled into another state.
The elements that guarantee the result of the T -> S transition are nonlocal (uniobserved) elements that guarantee the existence of the S state, the elements are "existence critical". No nonlocal elemenst associated with the observed state, no observed state.
RTge 2 slit experiment is directly analogous to the Stern-Gerlach transition experiments. LIke the ideal inhomogeneous magnetic field (fields with a magnetic gradient) of the SG apparatus, the charge distribution of the electron impinging on the surface of the material with the holes creates such a magnetic environment that the nonlocal elements areforced into an observed arrangeent. It is this characteristic of the electron that takes the other hole, when available, while the observed charactyeristics of the electron take the other hole.
In the Stern_Gerlach experiments the difference between a +S and +T state is simple. The +S state is the orientation of the particle magnetic spin vector, that when properly polarized in an S segment arranges the magnetic spin vector in an "up" orientation" wrt the lab frame of the SG S segment. The T segment is rotated a few degrees around the axis of travel and while the paritcles are inside the T segment the magnetic spin vector is orient to the "up" direction wrt the T frame. When exiting the nonlocal elements are instrumental in remembering the previous spin state as "up" wrt the lab frame and hence reformation of the original state is completed.
When se see that the use of one vs two holes drastically affects the distribution of the electrons on the cintillation screen we see a level of comleexity that is shrouded in mystery by the dreadful limitations imposed by quanmtum mechanical theory in describing the nature of the electron.
2inquisitive:
Do you have a standard English language dictionary?
And, do you have a grade school education, enabling you to execute at least a minimal amount of effective reading and writing?
If so, you might discern the difference between "understand" and "agreeing".
I sometimes am able to read between the lines of Physics Monkey's garbled and ultra-generalized statements and UNDERSTAND them. AGREEING with them can be something else.
If you think you never have any trouble understanding them, you are very easily amused.
Your silly questions can be easily answered in many books easily available to anyone with even modest reading skills. Are you delusional enough to halucinate that I am, or, desire to be, your personal free physics tutor?
Helpful hint: no.
If you think you never have any trouble agreeing with them, you just don't yet know and/or understand enough mainstream physics.
Do you have a standard English language dictionary?
And, do you have a grade school education, enabling you to execute at least a minimal amount of effective reading and writing?
If so, you might discern the difference between "understand" and "agreeing".
I sometimes am able to read between the lines of Physics Monkey's garbled and ultra-generalized statements and UNDERSTAND them. AGREEING with them can be something else.
If you think you never have any trouble understanding them, you are very easily amused.
Your silly questions can be easily answered in many books easily available to anyone with even modest reading skills. Are you delusional enough to halucinate that I am, or, desire to be, your personal free physics tutor?
Helpful hint: no.
If you think you never have any trouble agreeing with them, you just don't yet know and/or understand enough mainstream physics.
Last edited:
post by PhysMachine:
Well, OP, basically here's all there is to it. Particles behave more like waves than localized objects, and waves can interfere with each other. If you measure which slit the "particle" went through, then the particle will begin totally localize and disperse from that one slit as if it's the only source. If you don't do this, then in passing through each slit the waves will interfere like light does. You can observe this effect experimentally, too
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
======================================================
by CANGAS:
"2inquisitive:
Do you have a standard English language dictionary?
And, do you have a grade school education, enabling you to execute at least a minimal amount of effective reading and writing?
If so, you might discern the difference between "understand" and "agreeing".
I sometimes am able to read between the lines of Physics Monkey's garbled and ultra-generalized statements and UNDERSTAND them. AGREEING with them can be something else."
======================================================
CANGAS, you seem to be unable to UNDERSTAND PM's post. Or, would you like to point out what you disagree with?
Now, CANGAS, suppose you show where "I" lack the ability to discern the difference between "understand" and "agreeing". Do you, CANGAS, state that electrons lack the wavelike state? Or do you, CANGAS, state that electrons lack the particle-like state?
Also, CANGAS, tell us what state potassium atoms (fermions) are in when cooled to 150 nanoKelvin above absolute zero. Are they still 'particles'? Are they still fermions or are they bosons? You are the acknowledged expert, correct?
Well, OP, basically here's all there is to it. Particles behave more like waves than localized objects, and waves can interfere with each other. If you measure which slit the "particle" went through, then the particle will begin totally localize and disperse from that one slit as if it's the only source. If you don't do this, then in passing through each slit the waves will interfere like light does. You can observe this effect experimentally, too
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
CANGAS said:
======================================================
by CANGAS:
"2inquisitive:
Do you have a standard English language dictionary?
And, do you have a grade school education, enabling you to execute at least a minimal amount of effective reading and writing?
If so, you might discern the difference between "understand" and "agreeing".
I sometimes am able to read between the lines of Physics Monkey's garbled and ultra-generalized statements and UNDERSTAND them. AGREEING with them can be something else."
======================================================
CANGAS, you seem to be unable to UNDERSTAND PM's post. Or, would you like to point out what you disagree with?
Now, CANGAS, suppose you show where "I" lack the ability to discern the difference between "understand" and "agreeing". Do you, CANGAS, state that electrons lack the wavelike state? Or do you, CANGAS, state that electrons lack the particle-like state?
Also, CANGAS, tell us what state potassium atoms (fermions) are in when cooled to 150 nanoKelvin above absolute zero. Are they still 'particles'? Are they still fermions or are they bosons? You are the acknowledged expert, correct?
Last edited:
2inquisitive,
You have accidentally misquoted me, it was PhysMachine who actually made the post that you quote.
You have accidentally misquoted me, it was PhysMachine who actually made the post that you quote.
My apologies, Physics Monkey. The post I was referring to was by PhysMachine, the one in which CANGAS responded to before you posted on this thread. It seems CANGAS accused both you and PhysMachine of garbled syntax. I will edit my post.