Question about gravity
in [Physics]
|
From: mpc755 on 15 Apr 2010 09:57 On Apr 14, 5:45 pm, Esa Riihonen <e...(a)riihonen.net.not.invalid> wrote: > mpc755 kirjoitti: > > > The following is an explanation of what occurs in nature in a 'delayed > > choice quantum eraser' experiment. Following the explanation are two > > experiments which will provide evidence of Aether Displacement. > > > In the image on the right here: > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > > Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experiment > > I asked you to describe a _different_ more recent experiment presented > here: > > http://grad.physics.sunysb.edu/~amarch/ > > I specifically selected that experimental setup because it more clearly > than the wikipedia experiment brings out the salient features of the > issue. > Double-slit interference The aether wave associated with photon s exits both slits and creates interference which alters the direction the photon 'particle' travels and an interference pattern will be detected at Ds. Which-Way Marker Both left and right circularly polarized photons are being detected at Ds and as such there is no interference pattern. There are two interference patterns being created at Ds. One associated with the left circular polarized photons and one associated with the right circular polarized photons. What the coincidence counts tally image shows in the 'Which-Way Marker' section is the cumulative result. Quantum Erasure "A polarizer is placed in the p beam, oriented so that it will pass light that is a combination of x and y." The polarizer allows for a combination of x and y light waves to pass through but the polarizer is only allowing certain photons to pass through. The pair of the photons which pass through the polarizer will have the same circular polarization upon exiting the quarter wave plate. The pair of the photons which will have either left or right circular polarization, but not both, upon exiting the quarter wave plate will pass through the polarizer. Since only one set of circular polarized photons are being tallied, an interference pattern is detected at Ds. Delayed Erasure It doesn't matter if the photon interacts with the polarizer before or after its pair interacts with the quarter wave plate. Only certain photons pass through the polarizer and this correlates to either the left or right circular polarized photons which exit the quarter wave plate. Nothing is erased. Nothing is delayed.
From: Esa Riihonen on 26 Apr 2010 13:30 Once again - sorry for the delay, been busy + I had problems with my news server connections. I guess this 5th reply to my message is your best shot. mpc755 kirjoitti: > On Apr 14, 5:45 pm, Esa Riihonen <e...(a)riihonen.net.not.invalid> wrote: >> mpc755 kirjoitti: >> >> > The following is an explanation of what occurs in nature in a >> > 'delayed choice quantum eraser' experiment. Following the explanation >> > are two experiments which will provide evidence of Aether >> > Displacement. >> >> > In the image on the right here: >> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ >> >> Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experiment >> >> I asked you to describe a _different_ more recent experiment presented >> here: >> >> http://grad.physics.sunysb.edu/~amarch/ >> >> I specifically selected that experimental setup because it more clearly >> than the wikipedia experiment brings out the salient features of the >> issue. >> >> > Double-slit interference > > The aether wave associated with photon s exits both slits and creates > interference which alters the direction the photon 'particle' travels > and an interference pattern will be detected at Ds. > > Which-Way Marker > > Both left and right circularly polarized photons are being detected at > Ds and as such there is no interference pattern. There are two > interference patterns being created at Ds. One associated with the left > circular polarized photons and one associated with the right circular > polarized photons. What the coincidence counts tally image shows in the > 'Which-Way Marker' section is the cumulative result. In effect you are asserting that L and R photons will create differing interference patterns? I assume you can somehow elaborate how the aether model supports this prediction? BTW - I'm pretty sure this kind of simple experiment has been done already numerous times - with a null result. In addition I just can't see how you can even in principle combine (add) two interference patterns of the form shown to get the one without the interference? Look specifically the heights and coordinates of the side- branches - it seems there is no way you can combine two of these to get the 'no-interference' distribution. > Quantum Erasure > > "A polarizer is placed in the p beam, oriented so that it will pass > light that is a combination of x and y." > > The polarizer allows for a combination of x and y light waves to pass > through but the polarizer is only allowing certain photons to pass > through. The pair of the photons which pass through the polarizer will > have the same circular polarization upon exiting the quarter wave plate. > The pair of the photons which will have either left or right circular > polarization, but not both, upon exiting the quarter wave plate will > pass through the polarizer. Since only one set of circular polarized > photons are being tallied, an interference pattern is detected at Ds. Sorry I can't quite understand what you are trying to say above. How could a photon have both L and R polarization at the same time? I know that you are saying that they are not - but why the need to state the obvious? AFAICT it seems that you are claiming that only either L or R s-photons coincide with the passing p-photons. This seems quite a remarkable statement. There is obviously quite hard symmetry in the experiment regarding the x, y, L and R polarizations and the 45-polarizer. Why would a 45-degree polarizer for p-photons synch only either with L or R polarization of the s-photons? One should also consider the fact that the interference pattern without the QWP:s seem identical to the one with them installed (only half intensity of course). You indicated above that L and R photons will result in differing patterns to each other - why then the situation where only one is detected looks identical to the one without the QWPs? Anyways: 1) We know that the p-photon is linearly polarized in either x- or y- direction. 2) We know that the s-photon is linearly polarized perpendicular to the p- photon 3) We know that a 45-degree polarizer lets through half of both the x and y s-photons 4) As far as anyone can tell the process in 3 is genuinely random 5) We know that the interference pattern at s-det appears/disappears when the 45-polarizer in the p-photon path is inserted/removed. 6) It can be experimentally verified that both the R and L photons are present in equal amounts in all the s-det measurements. 7) In addition to the questions I raised above about specifics of your explanation - in general what you are insisting is an instance of a 'local hidden variable' explanation. Local hidden variables don't work as can be verified by experiments violating Bell's inequality. Alas, understanding this would require some mathematics. 8) And BTW where is the aether in your explanation? Remember that you should use this experiment to show how the aether will be superior in explaining these effects under discussion. You wouldn't like to give the impression that you are pulling these explanations from thin air as you go - right? > Delayed Erasure > > It doesn't matter if the photon interacts with the polarizer before or > after its pair interacts with the quarter wave plate. Only certain > photons pass through the polarizer and this correlates to either the > left or right circular polarized photons which exit the quarter wave > plate. > > Nothing is erased. Nothing is delayed. No need to discuss this before the previous issues are settled. Cheers, Esa(R) -- I know that this defies the law of gravity, but, you see, I never studied law. - Bugs Bunny
From: Esa Riihonen on 26 Apr 2010 13:37 Esa Riihonen kirjoitti: > Once again - sorry for the delay, been busy + I had problems with my > news server connections. > > I guess this 5th reply to my message is your best shot. > > > mpc755 kirjoitti: > >> On Apr 14, 5:45 pm, Esa Riihonen <e...(a)riihonen.net.not.invalid> wrote: >>> mpc755 kirjoitti: >>> >>> > The following is an explanation of what occurs in nature in a >>> > 'delayed choice quantum eraser' experiment. Following the >>> > explanation are two experiments which will provide evidence of >>> > Aether Displacement. >>> >>> > In the image on the right here: >>> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ >>> >>> Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experiment >>> >>> I asked you to describe a _different_ more recent experiment presented >>> here: >>> >>> http://grad.physics.sunysb.edu/~amarch/ >>> >>> I specifically selected that experimental setup because it more >>> clearly than the wikipedia experiment brings out the salient features >>> of the issue. >>> >>> >> Double-slit interference >> >> The aether wave associated with photon s exits both slits and creates >> interference which alters the direction the photon 'particle' travels >> and an interference pattern will be detected at Ds. >> >> Which-Way Marker >> >> Both left and right circularly polarized photons are being detected at >> Ds and as such there is no interference pattern. There are two >> interference patterns being created at Ds. One associated with the left >> circular polarized photons and one associated with the right circular >> polarized photons. What the coincidence counts tally image shows in the >> 'Which-Way Marker' section is the cumulative result. > > In effect you are asserting that L and R photons will create differing > interference patterns? I assume you can somehow elaborate how the aether > model supports this prediction? BTW - I'm pretty sure this kind of > simple experiment has been done already numerous times - with a null > result. > > In addition I just can't see how you can even in principle combine (add) > two interference patterns of the form shown to get the one without the > interference? Look specifically the heights and coordinates of the side- > branches - it seems there is no way you can combine two of these to get > the 'no-interference' distribution. > >> Quantum Erasure >> >> "A polarizer is placed in the p beam, oriented so that it will pass >> light that is a combination of x and y." >> >> The polarizer allows for a combination of x and y light waves to pass >> through but the polarizer is only allowing certain photons to pass >> through. The pair of the photons which pass through the polarizer will >> have the same circular polarization upon exiting the quarter wave >> plate. The pair of the photons which will have either left or right >> circular polarization, but not both, upon exiting the quarter wave >> plate will pass through the polarizer. Since only one set of circular >> polarized photons are being tallied, an interference pattern is >> detected at Ds. > > Sorry I can't quite understand what you are trying to say above. How > could a photon have both L and R polarization at the same time? I know > that you are saying that they are not - but why the need to state the > obvious? > > AFAICT it seems that you are claiming that only either L or R s-photons > coincide with the passing p-photons. This seems quite a remarkable > statement. There is obviously quite hard symmetry in the experiment > regarding the x, y, L and R polarizations and the 45-polarizer. Why > would a 45-degree polarizer for p-photons synch only either with L or R > polarization of the s-photons? One should also consider the fact that > the interference pattern without the QWP:s seem identical to the one > with them installed (only half intensity of course). You indicated above > that L and R photons will result in differing patterns to each other - > why then the situation where only one is detected looks identical to the > one without the QWPs? > > Anyways: > 1) We know that the p-photon is linearly polarized in either x- or y- > direction. > 2) We know that the s-photon is linearly polarized perpendicular to the > p- photon > 3) We know that a 45-degree polarizer lets through half of both the x > and y s-photons Ooooops - should be: p-photons. > 4) As far as anyone can tell the process in 3 is genuinely random 5) We > know that the interference pattern at s-det appears/disappears when the > 45-polarizer in the p-photon path is inserted/removed. 6) It can be > experimentally verified that both the R and L photons are present in > equal amounts in all the s-det measurements. 7) In addition to the > questions I raised above about specifics of your explanation - in > general what you are insisting is an instance of a 'local hidden > variable' explanation. Local hidden variables don't work as can be > verified by experiments violating Bell's inequality. Alas, understanding > this would require some mathematics. 8) And BTW where is the aether in > your explanation? Remember that you should use this experiment to show > how the aether will be superior in explaining these effects under > discussion. You wouldn't like to give the impression that you are > pulling these explanations from thin air as you go - right? > > >> Delayed Erasure >> >> It doesn't matter if the photon interacts with the polarizer before or >> after its pair interacts with the quarter wave plate. Only certain >> photons pass through the polarizer and this correlates to either the >> left or right circular polarized photons which exit the quarter wave >> plate. >> >> Nothing is erased. Nothing is delayed. > > No need to discuss this before the previous issues are settled. > > Cheers, > > Esa(R) -- I was having dinner with my boss and his wife and she said to me, "How many potatoes would you like Tim?". I said "Ooh, I'll just have one please". She said "It's OK, you don?t have to be polite" "Alright" I said "I'll just have one then, you stupid cow"
From: mpc755 on 26 Apr 2010 14:28 On Apr 26, 1:30 pm, Esa Riihonen <e...(a)riihonen.net.not.invalid> wrote: > Once again - sorry for the delay, been busy + I had problems with my news > server connections. > > I guess this 5th reply to my message is your best shot. > > mpc755 kirjoitti: > > > > > On Apr 14, 5:45 pm, Esa Riihonen <e...(a)riihonen.net.not.invalid> wrote: > >> mpc755 kirjoitti: > > >> > The following is an explanation of what occurs in nature in a > >> > 'delayed choice quantum eraser' experiment. Following the explanation > >> > are two experiments which will provide evidence of Aether > >> > Displacement. > > >> > In the image on the right here: > >> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > > >> Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experiment > > >> I asked you to describe a _different_ more recent experiment presented > >> here: > > >>http://grad.physics.sunysb.edu/~amarch/ > > >> I specifically selected that experimental setup because it more clearly > >> than the wikipedia experiment brings out the salient features of the > >> issue. > > > Double-slit interference > > > The aether wave associated with photon s exits both slits and creates > > interference which alters the direction the photon 'particle' travels > > and an interference pattern will be detected at Ds. > > > Which-Way Marker > > > Both left and right circularly polarized photons are being detected at > > Ds and as such there is no interference pattern. There are two > > interference patterns being created at Ds. One associated with the left > > circular polarized photons and one associated with the right circular > > polarized photons. What the coincidence counts tally image shows in the > > 'Which-Way Marker' section is the cumulative result. > > In effect you are asserting that L and R photons will create differing > interference patterns? Correct. > I assume you can somehow elaborate how the aether > model supports this prediction? Execute the experiment and test for it. > BTW - I'm pretty sure this kind of simple > experiment has been done already numerous times - with a null result. > Post a link to the experiment or keep you baseless assumptions to yourself. > In addition I just can't see how you can even in principle combine (add) > two interference patterns of the form shown to get the one without the > interference? Look specifically the heights and coordinates of the side- > branches - it seems there is no way you can combine two of these to get > the 'no-interference' distribution. > That is exactly what is occurring in the experiment. What is being displaced in the 'no-interference' distribution is the sum of the 'pings'. Check out Figures 3 and 4 here: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/quant-ph/pdf/9903/9903047v1.pdf The peak in Figure 3 corresponds with the troughs in Figure 4. If you are just adding 'pings' then the peaks and troughs combine so there is no interference pattern. If you know there are two interference patterns being created and add peaks together between Figures 3 and 4 and add troughs together then you do get an interference pattern of the original photon. But this is not what is occurring in the link you provided. That experiment is just counting 'pings'. The 'pings' correspond to Figure 5 in the article above. > > Quantum Erasure > > > "A polarizer is placed in the p beam, oriented so that it will pass > > light that is a combination of x and y." > > > The polarizer allows for a combination of x and y light waves to pass > > through but the polarizer is only allowing certain photons to pass > > through. The pair of the photons which pass through the polarizer will > > have the same circular polarization upon exiting the quarter wave plate.. > > The pair of the photons which will have either left or right circular > > polarization, but not both, upon exiting the quarter wave plate will > > pass through the polarizer. Since only one set of circular polarized > > photons are being tallied, an interference pattern is detected at Ds. > > Sorry I can't quite understand what you are trying to say above. How > could a photon have both L and R polarization at the same time? I know > that you are saying that they are not - but why the need to state the > obvious? > Because the L or R polarized photon exiting the QWP corresponds with the photon pair which passes through the polarizer. For example, if a Left polarized photon exits the QWP then either all associated photons either pass through the polarizer, or not. > AFAICT it seems that you are claiming that only either L or R s-photons > coincide with the passing p-photons. This seems quite a remarkable > statement. It is only remarkable for those who choose to believe in absurd nonsense of 'delayed choice' and 'quantum erasers'. > There is obviously quite hard symmetry in the experiment > regarding the x, y, L and R polarizations and the 45-polarizer. Why would > a 45-degree polarizer for p-photons synch only either with L or R > polarization of the s-photons? Why wouldn't it? This should be easily detected in the experiment. > One should also consider the fact that the > interference pattern without the QWP:s seem identical to the one with > them installed (only half intensity of course). You indicated above that > L and R photons will result in differing patterns to each other - why > then the situation where only one is detected looks identical to the one > without the QWPs? > Because it is half the intensity of the original interference pattern without the QWPs. Again, see Figures 3 and 4 in the line above. > Anyways: > 1) We know that the p-photon is linearly polarized in either x- or y- > direction. Which corresponds to a Left or Right polarized s-photon. > 2) We know that the s-photon is linearly polarized perpendicular to the p- > photon Which corresponds to a p-photon which passes through the polarizer, or not. > 3) We know that a 45-degree polarizer lets through half of both the x and > y [p]-photons Who's s-photon pair is either Left or Right polarized. > 4) As far as anyone can tell the process in 3 is genuinely random That must be due to ignorance. > 5) We know that the interference pattern at s-det appears/disappears when > the 45-polarizer in the p-photon path is inserted/removed. Due to the p-photon corresponding to a left or right polarize photon which allows for one of the two s-photon interference patterns to be determined. > 6) It can be experimentally verified that both the R and L photons are > present in equal amounts in all the s-det measurements. Even when the p-photon polarizer is inserted? > 7) In addition to the questions I raised above about specifics of your > explanation - in general what you are insisting is an instance of a > 'local hidden variable' explanation. Local hidden variables don't work as > can be verified by experiments violating Bell's inequality. Alas, > understanding this would require some mathematics. You fall back on Bell's inequality is a crutch. You said it yourself, if there is a discrepancy between conservation of momentum and Bell's inequality then you are siding with Bell's inequality. A statement like that is absurd. The only 'hidden variable' is the fact that the photons which pass through the polarizer correspond to either the left or right circular polarized photon pair. > 8) And BTW where is the aether in your explanation? Remember that you > should use this experiment to show how the aether will be superior in > explaining these effects under discussion. You wouldn't like to give the > impression that you are pulling these explanations from thin air as you > go - right? > The fact that you choose to believe in 'delayed choice' and 'quantum erasers' when that is incorrect and I am correctly explaining what occurs in the experiment you asked me to explain shows I am more correct. > > Delayed Erasure > > > It doesn't matter if the photon interacts with the polarizer before or > > after its pair interacts with the quarter wave plate. Only certain > > photons pass through the polarizer and this correlates to either the > > left or right circular polarized photons which exit the quarter wave > > plate. > > > Nothing is erased. Nothing is delayed. > > No need to discuss this before the previous issues are settled. > Really no need to continue this conversation at all as long as you put more faith in Bell's inequality then you do conservation of momentum. > Cheers, > > Esa(R) > > -- > I know that this defies the law of gravity, but, you see, I never > studied law. > - Bugs Bunny
From: spudnik on 26 Apr 2010 16:06
so, "Aether Displacement is a unified theory," deserving of capitalization?... well, what this is really about, is my net-addiction, because you would otherwise not be so God-am "productive," without the goading of my own predeliction. so, let me quote from the LaRouche site's lead-article: Max Planck began his series of lectures on thermodynamics in 1909 by asserting that science is the systematic investigation of sense perceptions. Our concepts of basic principles, like force, come from those senses. The task of science "consists only in the relating of sense perceptions, in accordance with experience, to fixed laws." Those laws were, themselves, always brought closer and closer into line with experience. But, this description was only a trap for the unsuspecting, for Planck then made an about-face, and asserted that, "ladies and gentlemen, this view has never contributed to any advance in physics." Relating the sense perceptions to one another with mathematics, and pulling logical derivations out of those relations, can be quite interesting, but this could never, in itself, derive a new discovery of principle. The generation of new knowledge about the universe comes from a world different from that of sense perception, but one which the human mind has access to. .... The concepts "material" and "energetic" are thus well defined. Material is the stuff you can sense, and energetic is why you can sense it. Energetic phenomena are generally continuous, while material phenomena are generally discrete. Who would mistake the light emitted from a light bulb, for the light bulb itself? But, are these two concepts really so well defined? http://larouchepub.com/lym/2010/3716new_periodic_table.html and, have a very nice day/life! http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1929/broglie-lecture.html |