Light isn't a particle
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: According to 1905 Relativity, a single material point must be always at rest
Next: Aether Displacement
From: mpc755 on 22 May 2010 15:07 In article <77d8d1b0-84d6-45b1-9082-1abfd2c73345 @g1g2000pro.googlegroups.com>, macromitch(a)yahoo.com says... > > On May 22, 11:39 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On May 22, 2:35 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 22, 11:28 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On May 22, 2:24 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 22, 11:21 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On May 22, 2:17 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On May 22, 3:04 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On May 22, 12:08 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On May 21, 8:55 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 20, 2:35 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the 1930's Einstein questioned what he won the Nobel prize for. He > > > > > > > > > > > said he could not reconcile the wave of light with a particle. in the > > > > > > > > > > > end. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Light is only a wave. It has no momentum like matter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > > > In a double slit experiment, detectors are placed at the exits to the > > > > > > > > > > slits. Why is the photon always detected exiting a single slit? Why > > > > > > > > > > isn't the light wave detected exiting both slits? > > > > > > > > > > > > The photon 'particle' has an associated wave and the particle always > > > > > > > > > > enters and exits a single slit while the associated wave enters and > > > > > > > > > > exits both slits. The associated wave creates interference which > > > > > > > > > > alters the direction the photon 'particle' travels. Detecting the > > > > > > > > > > 'particle' causes decoherence of the associated wave and there is no > > > > > > > > > > interference. > > > > > > > > > > > In the two slit experiment for electrons when there is light the wave > > > > > > > > > pattern goes away and the electrons pile up behind the holes instead. > > > > > > > > > Take away the light and it goes back to the wave pattern. > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > We are not discussing electrons. We are discussing a photon.. > > > > > > > > > But they don't exist. > > > > > > > > > There is no photon. But there is a wave nature of matter to talk > > > > > > > about. > > > > > > > > > The electron has a wave that collapses when interacting with light. > > > > > > > > > > You insist a photon is a light wave which does not have an associated > > > > > > > > 'particle'. > > > > > > > > > > If detectors are placed at the exits to the slits in a double slit > > > > > > > > experiment why is the photon always detected exiting a single slit? > > > > > > > > Why isn't the light wave detected exiting both slits? The light wave > > > > > > > > does exit both slits, correct? > > > > > > > > > > The photon wave has an associated 'particle' and the 'particle' always > > > > > > > > enters and exits a single slit while the associated wave enters and > > > > > > > > exits both slits. The associated wave creates interference which > > > > > > > > alters the direction the photon 'particle' travels. Detecting the > > > > > > > > 'particle' causes decoherence of the associated wave and there is no > > > > > > > > interference.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > > Light does not have a dual nature but matter does. The matter wave can > > > > > > > collapse. > > > > > > > > > Now we are talking about matter waves. > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > 'SINGLE PHOTON INTERFERENCE'http://www.physics.brown.edu/physics/demopages/Demo/modern/demo/7a552... > > > > > > > > If the experiment was modified to place detectors at the exits to the > > > > > > slits the single photon would always be detected exiting a single > > > > > > slit. If the light wave enters and exits both slits then what is > > > > > > detected exiting a single slit? If the light wave enters and exits > > > > > > both slits why is the light wave not detected exiting both slits? > > > > > > > > The photon wave has an associated 'particle' and the 'particle' always > > > > > > enters and exits a single slit while the associated wave enters and > > > > > > exits both slits. The associated wave creates interference which > > > > > > alters the direction the photon 'particle' travels. Detecting the > > > > > > 'particle' causes decoherence of the associated wave and there is no > > > > > > interference.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > Light is not a single wave. Light is both an electric and a magnetic > > > > > waves at right angles. There is no place for the photon. > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > Here is another single photon double slit experiment: > > > > > >http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~scidemos/QuantumRelativity/SinglePhotonIn... > > > > > > "Finally, the slit arrangement is such that it is possible to know > > > > which of the two slits the photons are passing through. In that case > > > > the Young's double-slit interference pattern does not manifest > > > > itself." > > > > > > How do you explain the ability to know which of the two slits the > > > > photon passes through? > > > > > Please demonstrate that we can first. But please don't make anything > > > up. > > > > > > The photon 'particle' always enters and exits a single slit and the > > > > photon wave enters and exits both slits. > > > > > > When the 'which-way' is determined the cohesion of the associated wave > > > > is destroyed and there is no interference.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > You are making an unfounded claim that we can somehow observe a light > > > wave. I know you would like to believe that but it isn't true. When we > > > do we call that seeing a colour. > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > The point I am making is we can not observe a light wave. That is what > > is incorrect with the Copenhagen interpretation of QM. Since the light > > wave can not be observed, the Copenhagen interpretation of QM assumes > > the particle behaves as a wave, which is incorrect. There is a > > physical wave and a physical 'particle' associated with a photon. The > > 'particle' occupies a very small region of the wave. > > > > Here is another single photon double slit experiment: > > > > http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~scidemos/QuantumRelativity/SinglePhotonIn.... > > > > "Finally, the slit arrangement is such that it is possible to know > > which of the two slits the photons are passing through. In that case > > the Young's double-slit interference pattern does not manifest > > itself." > > This needs to be challenged. > You need to understand it is correct. In any double slit experiment with photons, the interference pattern is built up over time by the individual registration of the photons. http://www.fas.harvard.edu/ ~scidemos/QuantumRelativity/SinglePhotonInterference/SinglePhotonInterfe rence.html "This alone is evidence for the graininess or particle nature of light." If a light wave did not consist of a 'particle' the interference pattern would show up like an ocean wave hitting the shore. This is not what occurs in a double slit experiment with photons. The photon makes an individual registration. It is the accumulation of the individual registrations which create the interference pattern. The individual registration is the 'particle'. "Finally, the slit arrangement is such that it is possible to know which of the two slits the photons are passing through. In that case the Young's double-slit interference pattern does not manifest itself." How do you explain the ability to know which of the two slits the photon passes through? The photon 'particle' always enters and exits a single slit and the photon wave enters and exits both slits. When the 'which-way' is determined the cohesion of the associated wave is destroyed and there is no interference. > > > > > How do you explain the ability to know which of the two slits the > > photon passes through? > > > > The photon 'particle' always enters and exits a single slit and the > > photon wave enters and exits both slits. > > > > When the 'which-way' is determined the cohesion of the associated wave > > is destroyed and there is no interference.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > In the end Einstein could not reconcile a particle and wave nature to > light. He was right to question what he won the Nobel Prize for. There > is no photon. > de Broglie was correct. The photon 'particle' occupies a very small region of the photon wave. The 'particle' can be thought of as physically existing as part of the wave itself. > We have never observed a photon. > Mitch Raemsch
From: BURT on 22 May 2010 15:17 On May 22, 12:07 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > In article <77d8d1b0-84d6-45b1-9082-1abfd2c73345 > @g1g2000pro.googlegroups.com>, macromi...(a)yahoo.com says... > > > > > > > > > On May 22, 11:39 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On May 22, 2:35 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 22, 11:28 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On May 22, 2:24 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 22, 11:21 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On May 22, 2:17 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On May 22, 3:04 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On May 22, 12:08 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On May 21, 8:55 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 20, 2:35 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the 1930's Einstein questioned what he won the Nobel prize for. He > > > > > > > > > > > > said he could not reconcile the wave of light with a particle. in the > > > > > > > > > > > > end. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Light is only a wave. It has no momentum like matter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > > > In a double slit experiment, detectors are placed at the exits to the > > > > > > > > > > > slits. Why is the photon always detected exiting a single slit? Why > > > > > > > > > > > isn't the light wave detected exiting both slits? > > > > > > > > > > > > The photon 'particle' has an associated wave and the particle always > > > > > > > > > > > enters and exits a single slit while the associated wave enters and > > > > > > > > > > > exits both slits. The associated wave creates interference which > > > > > > > > > > > alters the direction the photon 'particle' travels. Detecting the > > > > > > > > > > > 'particle' causes decoherence of the associated wave and there is no > > > > > > > > > > > interference. > > > > > > > > > > > In the two slit experiment for electrons when there is light the wave > > > > > > > > > > pattern goes away and the electrons pile up behind the holes instead. > > > > > > > > > > Take away the light and it goes back to the wave pattern. > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > We are not discussing electrons. We are discussing a photon. > > > > > > > > > But they don't exist. > > > > > > > > > There is no photon. But there is a wave nature of matter to talk > > > > > > > > about. > > > > > > > > > The electron has a wave that collapses when interacting with light. > > > > > > > > > > You insist a photon is a light wave which does not have an associated > > > > > > > > > 'particle'. > > > > > > > > > > If detectors are placed at the exits to the slits in a double slit > > > > > > > > > experiment why is the photon always detected exiting a single slit? > > > > > > > > > Why isn't the light wave detected exiting both slits? The light wave > > > > > > > > > does exit both slits, correct? > > > > > > > > > > The photon wave has an associated 'particle' and the 'particle' always > > > > > > > > > enters and exits a single slit while the associated wave enters and > > > > > > > > > exits both slits. The associated wave creates interference which > > > > > > > > > alters the direction the photon 'particle' travels. Detecting the > > > > > > > > > 'particle' causes decoherence of the associated wave and there is no > > > > > > > > > interference.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > > Light does not have a dual nature but matter does. The matter wave can > > > > > > > > collapse. > > > > > > > > > Now we are talking about matter waves. > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > 'SINGLE PHOTON INTERFERENCE'http://www.physics.brown.edu/physics/demopages/Demo/modern/demo/7a552... > > > > > > > > If the experiment was modified to place detectors at the exits to the > > > > > > > slits the single photon would always be detected exiting a single > > > > > > > slit. If the light wave enters and exits both slits then what is > > > > > > > detected exiting a single slit? If the light wave enters and exits > > > > > > > both slits why is the light wave not detected exiting both slits? > > > > > > > > The photon wave has an associated 'particle' and the 'particle' always > > > > > > > enters and exits a single slit while the associated wave enters and > > > > > > > exits both slits. The associated wave creates interference which > > > > > > > alters the direction the photon 'particle' travels. Detecting the > > > > > > > 'particle' causes decoherence of the associated wave and there is no > > > > > > > interference.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > Light is not a single wave. Light is both an electric and a magnetic > > > > > > waves at right angles. There is no place for the photon. > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > Here is another single photon double slit experiment: > > > > > >http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~scidemos/QuantumRelativity/SinglePhotonIn... > > > > > > "Finally, the slit arrangement is such that it is possible to know > > > > > which of the two slits the photons are passing through. In that case > > > > > the Young's double-slit interference pattern does not manifest > > > > > itself." > > > > > > How do you explain the ability to know which of the two slits the > > > > > photon passes through? > > > > > Please demonstrate that we can first. But please don't make anything > > > > up. > > > > > > The photon 'particle' always enters and exits a single slit and the > > > > > photon wave enters and exits both slits. > > > > > > When the 'which-way' is determined the cohesion of the associated wave > > > > > is destroyed and there is no interference.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > You are making an unfounded claim that we can somehow observe a light > > > > wave. I know you would like to believe that but it isn't true. When we > > > > do we call that seeing a colour. > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > The point I am making is we can not observe a light wave. That is what > > > is incorrect with the Copenhagen interpretation of QM. Since the light > > > wave can not be observed, the Copenhagen interpretation of QM assumes > > > the particle behaves as a wave, which is incorrect. There is a > > > physical wave and a physical 'particle' associated with a photon. The > > > 'particle' occupies a very small region of the wave. > > > > Here is another single photon double slit experiment: > > > >http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~scidemos/QuantumRelativity/SinglePhotonIn.... > > > > "Finally, the slit arrangement is such that it is possible to know > > > which of the two slits the photons are passing through. In that case > > > the Young's double-slit interference pattern does not manifest > > > itself." > > > This needs to be challenged. > > You need to understand it is correct. In any double slit experiment with > photons, the interference pattern is built up over time by the > individual registration of the photons. > > http://www.fas.harvard.edu/ > ~scidemos/QuantumRelativity/SinglePhotonInterference/SinglePhotonInterfe > rence.html > > "This alone is evidence for the graininess or particle nature of light." > > If a light wave did not consist of a 'particle' the interference pattern > would show up like an ocean wave hitting the shore. This is not what > occurs in a double slit experiment with photons. The photon makes an > individual registration. It is the accumulation of the individual > registrations which create the interference pattern. > > The individual registration is the 'particle'. > > "Finally, the slit arrangement is such that it is possible to know > which of the two slits the photons are passing through. In that case > the Young's double-slit interference pattern does not manifest > itself." > > How do you explain the ability to know which of the two slits the > photon passes through? > > The photon 'particle' always enters and exits a single slit and the > photon wave enters and exits both slits. > > When the 'which-way' is determined the cohesion of the associated wave > is destroyed and there is no interference. > > > > > > > > > > How do you explain the ability to know which of the two slits the > > > photon passes through? > > > > The photon 'particle' always enters and exits a single slit and the > > > photon wave enters and exits both slits. > > > > When the 'which-way' is determined the cohesion of the associated wave > > > is destroyed and there is no interference.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > In the end Einstein could not reconcile a particle and wave nature to > > light. He was right to question what he won the Nobel Prize for. There > > is no photon. > > de Broglie was correct. The photon 'particle' occupies a very small > region of the photon wave. The 'particle' can be thought of as > physically existing as part of the wave itself. > > > > > We have never observed a photon. > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - If light is an electric wave and a magnetic wave and also a particle- wave then light would be a tripple wave phenomenon. No. There is no photon. All that we observe is dual electromagnetic waves. Mitch Raemsch
From: mpc755 on 22 May 2010 15:21 In article <9de8367d-9a58-448e-98e0-b0963e04bd10 @s4g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, macromitch(a)yahoo.com says... > > On May 22, 12:07 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > In article <77d8d1b0-84d6-45b1-9082-1abfd2c73345 > > @g1g2000pro.googlegroups.com>, macromi...(a)yahoo.com says... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 22, 11:39 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On May 22, 2:35 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 22, 11:28 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On May 22, 2:24 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On May 22, 11:21 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On May 22, 2:17 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On May 22, 3:04 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 22, 12:08 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 21, 8:55 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 20, 2:35 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the 1930's Einstein questioned what he won the Nobel prize for. He > > > > > > > > > > > > > said he could not reconcile the wave of light with a particle. in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > end. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Light is only a wave. It has no momentum like matter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a double slit experiment, detectors are placed at the exits to the > > > > > > > > > > > > slits. Why is the photon always detected exiting a single slit? Why > > > > > > > > > > > > isn't the light wave detected exiting both slits? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The photon 'particle' has an associated wave and the particle always > > > > > > > > > > > > enters and exits a single slit while the associated wave enters and > > > > > > > > > > > > exits both slits. The associated wave creates interference which > > > > > > > > > > > > alters the direction the photon 'particle' travels. Detecting the > > > > > > > > > > > > 'particle' causes decoherence of the associated wave and there is no > > > > > > > > > > > > interference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the two slit experiment for electrons when there is light the wave > > > > > > > > > > > pattern goes away and the electrons pile up behind the holes instead. > > > > > > > > > > > Take away the light and it goes back to the wave pattern. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > > > We are not discussing electrons. We are discussing a photon. > > > > > > > > > > > But they don't exist. > > > > > > > > > > > There is no photon. But there is a wave nature of matter to talk > > > > > > > > > about. > > > > > > > > > > > The electron has a wave that collapses when interacting with light. > > > > > > > > > > > > You insist a photon is a light wave which does not have an associated > > > > > > > > > > 'particle'. > > > > > > > > > > > > If detectors are placed at the exits to the slits in a double slit > > > > > > > > > > experiment why is the photon always detected exiting a single slit? > > > > > > > > > > Why isn't the light wave detected exiting both slits? The light wave > > > > > > > > > > does exit both slits, correct? > > > > > > > > > > > > The photon wave has an associated 'particle' and the 'particle' always > > > > > > > > > > enters and exits a single slit while the associated wave enters and > > > > > > > > > > exits both slits. The associated wave creates interference which > > > > > > > > > > alters the direction the photon 'particle' travels. Detecting the > > > > > > > > > > 'particle' causes decoherence of the associated wave and there is no > > > > > > > > > > interference.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > Light does not have a dual nature but matter does. The matter wave can > > > > > > > > > collapse. > > > > > > > > > > > Now we are talking about matter waves. > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > 'SINGLE PHOTON INTERFERENCE'http://www.physics.brown.edu/physics/demopages/Demo/modern/demo/7a552... > > > > > > > > > > If the experiment was modified to place detectors at the exits to the > > > > > > > > slits the single photon would always be detected exiting a single > > > > > > > > slit. If the light wave enters and exits both slits then what is > > > > > > > > detected exiting a single slit? If the light wave enters and exits > > > > > > > > both slits why is the light wave not detected exiting both slits? > > > > > > > > > > The photon wave has an associated 'particle' and the 'particle' always > > > > > > > > enters and exits a single slit while the associated wave enters and > > > > > > > > exits both slits. The associated wave creates interference which > > > > > > > > alters the direction the photon 'particle' travels. Detecting the > > > > > > > > 'particle' causes decoherence of the associated wave and there is no > > > > > > > > interference.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > > Light is not a single wave. Light is both an electric and a magnetic > > > > > > > waves at right angles. There is no place for the photon. > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > Here is another single photon double slit experiment: > > > > > > > >http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~scidemos/QuantumRelativity/SinglePhotonIn... > > > > > > > > "Finally, the slit arrangement is such that it is possible to know > > > > > > which of the two slits the photons are passing through. In that case > > > > > > the Young's double-slit interference pattern does not manifest > > > > > > itself." > > > > > > > > How do you explain the ability to know which of the two slits the > > > > > > photon passes through? > > > > > > > Please demonstrate that we can first. But please don't make anything > > > > > up. > > > > > > > > The photon 'particle' always enters and exits a single slit and the > > > > > > photon wave enters and exits both slits. > > > > > > > > When the 'which-way' is determined the cohesion of the associated wave > > > > > > is destroyed and there is no interference.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > You are making an unfounded claim that we can somehow observe a light > > > > > wave. I know you would like to believe that but it isn't true. When we > > > > > do we call that seeing a colour. > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > The point I am making is we can not observe a light wave. That is what > > > > is incorrect with the Copenhagen interpretation of QM. Since the light > > > > wave can not be observed, the Copenhagen interpretation of QM assumes > > > > the particle behaves as a wave, which is incorrect. There is a > > > > physical wave and a physical 'particle' associated with a photon. The > > > > 'particle' occupies a very small region of the wave. > > > > > > Here is another single photon double slit experiment: > > > > > >http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~scidemos/QuantumRelativity/SinglePhotonIn... > > > > > > "Finally, the slit arrangement is such that it is possible to know > > > > which of the two slits the photons are passing through. In that case > > > > the Young's double-slit interference pattern does not manifest > > > > itself." > > > > > This needs to be challenged. > > > > You need to understand it is correct. In any double slit experiment with > > photons, the interference pattern is built up over time by the > > individual registration of the photons. > > > > http://www.fas.harvard.edu/ > > ~scidemos/QuantumRelativity/SinglePhotonInterference/SinglePhotonInterfe > > rence.html > > > > "This alone is evidence for the graininess or particle nature of light." > > > > If a light wave did not consist of a 'particle' the interference pattern > > would show up like an ocean wave hitting the shore. This is not what > > occurs in a double slit experiment with photons. The photon makes an > > individual registration. It is the accumulation of the individual > > registrations which create the interference pattern. > > > > The individual registration is the 'particle'. > > > > "Finally, the slit arrangement is such that it is possible to know > > which of the two slits the photons are passing through. In that case > > the Young's double-slit interference pattern does not manifest > > itself." > > > > How do you explain the ability to know which of the two slits the > > photon passes through? > > > > The photon 'particle' always enters and exits a single slit and the > > photon wave enters and exits both slits. > > > > When the 'which-way' is determined the cohesion of the associated wave > > is destroyed and there is no interference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How do you explain the ability to know which of the two slits the > > > > photon passes through? > > > > > > The photon 'particle' always enters and exits a single slit and the > > > > photon wave enters and exits both slits. > > > > > > When the 'which-way' is determined the cohesion of the associated wave > > > > is destroyed and there is no interference.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > In the end Einstein could not reconcile a particle and wave nature to > > > light. He was right to question what he won the Nobel Prize for. There > > > is no photon. > > > > de Broglie was correct. The photon 'particle' occupies a very small > > region of the photon wave. The 'particle' can be thought of as > > physically existing as part of the wave itself. > > > > > > > > > We have never observed a photon. > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > If light is an electric wave and a magnetic wave and also a particle- > wave then light would be a tripple wave phenomenon. > > No. There is no photon. All that we observe is dual electromagnetic > waves. > Mitch Raemsch In a double slit experiment with photons, why is the interference pattern built up over time based upon individual registrations? In a double slit experiment with photons, if there is no 'particle' associated with the photon wave, then why isn't the interference pattern created similar to an ocean wave hitting the shore? http://www.fas.harvard.edu/ ~scidemos/QuantumRelativity/SinglePhotonInterference/SinglePhotonInterfe rence.html "Rather than the usual screen, the arrival of individual photons is registered and stored electronically. This alone is evidence for the graininess or particle nature of light." The photon 'particle' occupies a very small region of the wave.
From: BURT on 22 May 2010 15:26 Which wave is the particle in? the electric or the magnetic? Mitch Raemsch
From: mpc755 on 22 May 2010 15:37
In article <41f36c89-0e3c-4e42-9506- 61eccb27c4ce(a)y6g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, macromitch(a)yahoo.com says... > > Which wave is the particle in? the electric or the magnetic? > > Mitch Raemsch http://science.hq.nasa.gov/kids/imagers/ems/waves2.html "Electromagnetic waves are formed when an electric field (shown as blue arrows) couples with a magnetic field (shown as red arrows). The magnetic and electric fields of an electromagnetic wave are perpendicular to each other and to the direction of the wave." ....of AN electromagnetic wave...and to the direction of THE wave. The 'particle' occupies a very small region of AN electromagnetic wave. The 'particle' occupies a very small region of THE wave. In a double slit experiment with photons, why is the interference pattern built up over time based upon individual registrations? In a double slit experiment with photons, if there is no 'particle' associated with the photon wave, then why isn't the interference pattern created similar to an ocean wave hitting the shore? http://www.fas.harvard.edu/ ~scidemos/QuantumRelativity/SinglePhotonInterference/SinglePhotonInterfe rence.html "Rather than the usual screen, the arrival of individual photons is registered and stored electronically. This alone is evidence for the graininess or particle nature of light." The photon 'particle' occupies a very small region of the wave. |