Two slit experiment
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Apollo Mission: a Giant Leap Discrediting Greenhouse Gas Theory
Next: Misconceptions from bad use of language was Re: Two slit experiment
From: Sam Wormley on 30 May 2010 00:49 On 5/29/10 10:00 AM, rick_s wrote: > So has anyone figured out the faulty logic yet wrt the two slit experiment? > There is no faulty logic, but there is likely faulty understanding on your part, Rick. Skip your analogies and tell me specifically what is troubling you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment "In quantum mechanics, the double-slit experiment (often referred to as Young's experiment) demonstrates the inseparability of the wave and particle natures of light and other quantum particles. A coherent light source (e.g., a laser) illuminates a thin plate with two parallel slits cut in it, and the light passing through the slits strikes a screen behind them. The wave nature of light causes the light waves passing through both slits to interfere, creating an interference pattern of bright and dark bands on the screen. However, at the screen, the light is always found to be absorbed as though it were made of discrete particles, called photons".
From: Benj on 30 May 2010 01:12 On May 29, 9:41 pm, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > rick_s wrote: > >> The untutored always seem to think they know the answer. > > > And the unwashed masses always consider an ad hominem attack a logical > > argument. Got that right, especially with Gisse. > Don't say stupid things about an experiment you have obviously never > performed or read about, and I won't call you untutored. > > Besides, my thoughts on physics carry a shade more weight than 'the unwashed > masses' given I actually have a credible education in the subject. There are many who would question the word "credible"...
From: Y.Porat on 30 May 2010 04:59 On May 30, 6:38 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On May 29, 9:26 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 30, 1:11 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 5/29/10 10:00 AM, rick_s wrote: > > > > > So has anyone figured out the faulty logic yet wrt the two slit experiment? > > > > Faulty Logic? > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment > > > > "In quantum mechanics, the double-slit experiment (often referred to as > > > Young's experiment) demonstrates the inseparability of the wave and > > > particle natures of light and other quantum particles. A coherent light > > > source (e.g., a laser) illuminates a thin plate with two parallel slits > > > cut in it, and the light passing through the slits strikes a screen > > > behind them. The wave nature of light causes the light waves passing > > > through both slits to interfere, creating an interference pattern of > > > bright and dark bands on the screen. However, at the screen, the light > > > is always found to be absorbed as though it were made of discrete > > > particles, called photons". > > > ------------------- > > yest Mr parrot Wormley > > you ddint tell the whole 'story'!! > > the other story about itis > > listen carefully > > > that even a **single photon' > > 'can interfere with himself "!!!! > > and a single photon is defined by > > your fucken QM as > > E=hf > > while i showed and proved that > > E=hf > > IS NOT THE REAL FORMULA > > FOR THE REAL PHYSICAL SINGLE PHOTON!!!! > > got it fucken potato head parrot ???!! > > the real single photon energy is > > hf times * 'Planck time'* > > which gives about (quote from my own week memory) > > about exp -77 Joule !! > > so from now on Mr Parrot W > > just remember it and tell it to your > > new young readers > > and tell them that there are some new innovations after 100 years of > > fucken > > crippled QM !! > > > ATB > > Y.Porat > > ----------------------------- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Why do physicts set Plancks constant they call H-Bar to zero? > They set it to One for the energy from the frequency of light. ------------------------ you can always decide that you start a 'new' set of physics dimensions by setting one of the free degrees of freedom to be 1.000 but that does not change the physics behind it as long as you dont contradict physics facts *and you dont forget- for a moment -the way you defined your private system. on the other hand you cannot create arbitrary new rules of the physics game like for instance defining the mass of the photon to be zero or to say that 'no mass can reach c !!!! because by that you base your system on a false base !!! (which is your private interpretation even of experimental data that are wrong interpretations or private extrapolations of experimental data ) while the results of it will be ACCORDINGLY (:-) ATB Y.Porat -----------------------
From: Paul Cardinale on 30 May 2010 10:08 On May 29, 8:00 am, rick_s <h...(a)my.com> wrote: > So has anyone figured out the faulty logic yet wrt the two slit experiment? > > The fact that the screen is made of dots, never occurred to anyone that > is why the screen looked dot like when they were observing the fringing? Are you one of the fake idiots?
From: Y.Porat on 30 May 2010 10:27
On May 30, 4:08 pm, Paul Cardinale <pcardin...(a)volcanomail.com> wrote: > On May 29, 8:00 am, rick_s <h...(a)my.com> wrote: > > > So has anyone figured out the faulty logic yet wrt the two slit experiment? > > > The fact that the screen is made of dots, never occurred to anyone that > > is why the screen looked dot like when they were observing the fringing? > > Are you one of the fake idiots? ---------------------- Mr genius can a single photon interfere with itself as QM claim ?? TIA Y.Porat ------------------------- |