NYT - 7/13/10 - "Gravity Does Not Exist", but pseudoscience rules
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: NYT - 7/13/10 - "Gravity Does Not Exist", but pseudosciencerules
Next: The inertial frame concept in 1905 Relativity
From: spudnik on 14 Jul 2010 23:00 dynamical 3-space is nice, since it implies coordination with time; what use is a single instant in the flipbook of timespace? as for stringtheory, it apperantly subsumes GR and QM so, find a better representation that uses it. > Both are easier to comprehend than Loop Quantum Gravity or String > Theory. --les ducs d'oil! http://tarpley.net
From: mpc755 on 14 Jul 2010 23:16 On Jul 14, 11:09 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > I challenge you to find Robert Young's two-hole write-up; > perhaps that will lay to rest your obsession with a rock o'light, > the absurdity of a massless momentumness (or > of a perfect vacuum, through which it must self-go .-) > > the thing about fullerenes is really a problem, though, and > Surfer has more of an idea about, than you seem to, viz, > the particles also interact with the material between the slits > (see Fresnel and Fraunhofer, I think) and at the edges and, > of course, the medium of air, between them. > A C-60 molecule, 60 interconnected atoms, is not able to travel through the divider separating the slits without a change in momentum. If it was possible, placing detectors at the end of the divider would detect the particle. If a particle can occupy any region of the wave function at any particular time, including the portion of the wave function which is magically traveling through the divider without losing momentum then why isn't the particle ever detected exiting the divider? The particle is never detected exiting the divider because the particle never travels through the divider. The particle travels a single patch and enters and exits a single slit. The associated dark matter displacement wave enters and exits multiple slits. The associated dark matter displacement wave creates interference upon exiting the slits which alters the direction the particle travels. Detecting the particle causes decoherence of the associated dark matter displacement wave (i.e. turns the wave into chop) and there is no interference.
From: mpc755 on 14 Jul 2010 23:24 On Jul 14, 11:16 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 14, 11:09 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > I challenge you to find Robert Young's two-hole write-up; > > perhaps that will lay to rest your obsession with a rock o'light, > > the absurdity of a massless momentumness (or > > of a perfect vacuum, through which it must self-go .-) > > > the thing about fullerenes is really a problem, though, and > > Surfer has more of an idea about, than you seem to, viz, > > the particles also interact with the material between the slits > > (see Fresnel and Fraunhofer, I think) and at the edges and, > > of course, the medium of air, between them. > > A C-60 molecule, 60 interconnected atoms, is not able to travel > through the divider separating the slits without a change in momentum. > If it was possible, placing detectors at the end of the divider would > detect the particle. > > If a particle can occupy any region of the wave function at any > particular time, including the portion of the wave function which is > magically traveling through the divider without losing momentum then > why isn't the particle ever detected exiting the divider? > > The particle is never detected exiting the divider because the > particle never travels through the divider. The particle travels a > single patch and enters and exits a single slit. The associated dark > matter displacement wave enters and exits multiple slits. The > associated dark matter displacement wave creates interference upon > exiting the slits which alters the direction the particle travels. > Detecting the particle causes decoherence of the associated dark > matter displacement wave (i.e. turns the wave into chop) and there is > no interference. If the particle were able to occupy any portion of the wave function, including the portion of the wave function which is magically traveling through the divider, then the wave function would exit the slits and the divider as a single entity and there would be no interference. Are we done with the ridiculous nonsense of the particle traveling through the divider without losing momentum, exiting the slits and the divider as a single entity, and still being able to interfere with itself, all the while it is never detected exiting the divider? Why is the particle always detected exiting a single slit in a double slit experiment? Because the particle always enters and exits a single slit, Duh!
From: spudnik on 14 Jul 2010 23:30 whack those macros, lightrockboy! > Because the particle always enters and exits a single slit, Duh! --les ducs d'oil! http://tarpley.net
From: mpc755 on 14 Jul 2010 23:35
On Jul 14, 11:30 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > whack those macros, lightrockboy! > > > Because the particle always enters and exits a single slit, Duh! > > --les ducs d'oil!http://tarpley.net How did physics get so screwed up to the point where a C-60 molecule can enter, travel through, and exit multiple slits simultaneously, and travel through the divider separating the slits, without losing momentum and exit the slits simultaneously, and interfere with itself, all the while if there are detectors at the exits the C-60 magically exits a single slit instantaneously, or has determined in the past to enter one slit or multiple slits depending upon their being detectors at the exits to the slits when it gets there in the future? When did physics start having nothing to do with nature? A moving particle has an associated dark matter displacement wave. |