Two slit experiment is FALSE
in [Relativity]
|
From: guskz on 27 Jun 2010 13:17 Same as Einstein's postulates came "after" certain approved discoveries. Likewise everyone's been too busy, to reformulate old experiments. Science now recognizes that charges interact by emitting virtual photons, likewise charges emit real photons as when the electron moves to a lower orbit. Thus the two slit experiment proves nothing other than the opposite slits may have discharged their own light. Likewise situation for quantum tunneling. Both experiments very possibly Newton's Cradle effects, meaning not the same particle/photon being emitted as that received. 2010: Before Einstein, GUSKZ.
From: bert on 27 Jun 2010 20:49 On Jun 27, 1:17 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Same as Einstein's postulates came "after" certain approved > discoveries. Likewise everyone's been too busy, to reformulate old > experiments. > > Science now recognizes that charges interact by emitting virtual > photons, likewise charges emit real photons as when the electron moves > to a lower orbit. > > Thus the two slit experiment proves nothing other than the opposite > slits may have discharged their own light. > > Likewise situation for quantum tunneling. Both experiments very > possibly Newton's Cradle effects, meaning not the same particle/photon > being emitted as that received. > > 2010: Before Einstein, GUSKZ. Feynman had the experiment as being the heart of QM He used his theory "Sum of all paths" as an answer I too have a theory on two slits. Its amazing,but so is QM TreBert
From: Y.Porat on 28 Jun 2010 00:03 On Jun 27, 7:17 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Same as Einstein's postulates came "after" certain approved > discoveries. Likewise everyone's been too busy, to reformulate old > experiments. > > Science now recognizes that charges interact by emitting virtual > photons, likewise charges emit real photons as when the electron moves > to a lower orbit. > > Thus the two slit experiment proves nothing other than the opposite > slits may have discharged their own light. > > Likewise situation for quantum tunneling. Both experiments very > possibly Newton's Cradle effects, meaning not the same particle/photon > being emitted as that received. > > 2010: Before Einstein, GUSKZ. -------------------- The trouble in that two slits experiment is no in a wave that is composed of a huge nymver of photons THE TROUBLE IS ABOUT THE **STOTY'' THAT A '''SINGLE PHOTON CAN INTERFERE WITH ITSELF-- WHICH IS **PHYSICS NONSENSE !!! BECAUSE .... THE DENINITION OF A 'SINGLE PHOTON IS WRONG !!! i showed that the real single photon is emitted duRing one PLANK TIME!! and not during one second iow hf isnotthe real definition of the real single photon!! a real single photon cannot interfere with itself (in a similar way that ***you cannot interfere with yourself *** (:-) that is going to be **the Porat rule*** in addition (and similar) to the Pauli rule !!!! ATB Y.Porat -------------------------------
From: Inertial on 28 Jun 2010 00:19 "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:f4100867-4f6a-45da-a787-1b6a9a4d5b77(a)r27g2000yqb.googlegroups.com... > On Jun 27, 7:17 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> Same as Einstein's postulates came "after" certain approved >> discoveries. Likewise everyone's been too busy, to reformulate old >> experiments. >> >> Science now recognizes that charges interact by emitting virtual >> photons, likewise charges emit real photons as when the electron moves >> to a lower orbit. >> >> Thus the two slit experiment proves nothing other than the opposite >> slits may have discharged their own light. >> >> Likewise situation for quantum tunneling. Both experiments very >> possibly Newton's Cradle effects, meaning not the same particle/photon >> being emitted as that received. >> >> 2010: Before Einstein, GUSKZ. > > -------------------- > The trouble in that > two slits experiment is no in a wave that is > composed of a huge nymver of photons It is BOTH a wave (or wave-like) AND a large number of photon particles (or particle-like). > THE TROUBLE IS ABOUT THE **STOTY'' Stoty? > THAT A '''SINGLE PHOTON CAN INTERFERE WITH ITSELF-- But it does > WHICH IS **PHYSICS NONSENSE !!! Reality isn't physics nonsense > BECAUSE .... > THE DENINITION OF A 'SINGLE PHOTON > IS WRONG !!! No .. its not. You've just been using the energy of a photon being hf in your last round of posts. You very happily argued that the momentum of a photon is P = E/c = hf/c ... so E = hf > i showed that the real single photon > is emitted duRing one PLANK TIME!! No .. you just claimed it did .. after myself and other posters told that a phoont must be created within an instant (a single quantum of time, if time is quantised) > and not during > one second NOONE says it is in a second. This is just one of your nonsense statments that you pretend other people are saying so you can argue against it > iow > hf isnotthe real definition of the real single photon!! But you've just been using it that way. And EXPERIMENT shows that it is > a real single photon > cannot interfere with itself But it does > (in a similar way that > ***you cannot interfere with yourself *** (:-) I'm sure you do a lot of that > that is going to be > **the Porat rule*** BAHAHAHAHA > in addition (and similar) to the > Pauli rule !!!! But he was a scientist and intelligent .. you are barely human and no nothing of science. How dare you compare yourself to Pauli.
From: kenseto on 28 Jun 2010 09:51 On Jun 27, 1:17 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Same as Einstein's postulates came "after" certain approved > discoveries. Likewise everyone's been too busy, to reformulate old > experiments. > > Science now recognizes that charges interact by emitting virtual > photons, likewise charges emit real photons as when the electron moves > to a lower orbit. > > Thus the two slit experiment proves nothing other than the opposite > slits may have discharged their own light. > > Likewise situation for quantum tunneling. Both experiments very > possibly Newton's Cradle effects, meaning not the same particle/photon > being emitted as that received. > > 2010: Before Einstein, GUSKZ. A physical explanation of the double-slit experiment is available in the following link: http://www/modelmechanics.org/2008experiment.pdf
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 Prev: Scientific American: Light losing energy! Next: The REAL Pauli Particle Principle |