What's your guys' take on Moving Dimensions Theory? Vs. String Theory / LQG?
in [Relativity]
|
From: cjcountess on 14 Nov 2009 09:27 So are you saying that, sense photons interfere with themselves, indicating a substructure, that they do indeed, as individials, expand sphericaly? Conrad J Countess
From: dre on 14 Nov 2009 11:36 A photon's wave interfers with itself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment When light came to be understood as the result of electrons falling from higher energy orbits to lower energy orbits, the light that is delivered to some surface in any short interval of time came to be understood as ordinarily representing the arrival of very many photons, each with its own wave front. In understanding what actually happens in the two-slit experiment it became important to find out what happens when photons are emitted one by one.[11] When it became possible to perform that experiment, it became apparent that a single photon has its own wave front that passes through both slits, and that the single photon will show up on the detector screen according to the net probability values resulting from the co- incidence of the two probability waves coming by way of the two slits. When a great number of photons are sent through the apparatus one by one and recorded on photographic film, the same interference pattern emerges that had been seen before when many photons were being emitted at the same time. The low intensity double-slit experiment was first performed by Taylor in 1909,[13] by reducing the level of incident light until on average only one photon was being transmitted at a time. [11] Note that it is the probabilities of photons appearing at various points along the detection screen that add or cancel. So if there is a cancellation of waves at some point that does not mean that a photon disappears; it means that the probability of a photon's appearing at that point will disappear, and the probability that it will appear somewhere else increases. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment In its simplest form in free space, a photon is represented by a spherically-symetric probabilistic wavefront. Surely you have heard of Huygens' Principle and Young's Double Slit Experiment? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huygens%E2%80%93Fresnel_principle In relativity a photon remains stationary in the fourth dimension. A photon is timeless and ageless. Surely you have heard of Einstein's Relativity? Can anyone refute any of these proofs? "Simple, logical proofs of MDT: MDT PROOF#1: Relativity tells us that a timeless, ageless photon remains in one place in the fourth dimension. Quantum mechanics tells us that a photon propagates as a spherically-symmetric expanding wavefront at the velocity of c. Ergo, the fourth dimension must be expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, in a spherically-symmetric manner. The expansion of the fourth dimension is the source of nonlocality, entanglement, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, c, relativity, entropy, free will, and all motion, change, and measurement, for no measurement can be made without change. For the first time in the history of relativity, change has been wedded to the fundamental fabric of spacetime in MDT. MDT PROOF#2: Einstein (1912 Man. on Rel.) and Minkowski wrote x4=ict. Ergo dx4/dt=ic. MDT PROOF#3: The only way to stay stationary in the three spatial dimensions is to move at c through the fourth dimension. The only way to stay stationary in the fourth dimension is to move at c through the three spatial dimensions. Ergo the fourth dimension is moving at c relative to the three spatial dimensions. MDT twitter proof (limited to 140 characters): SR: photon is stationary in 4th dimension. QM: photon is probability wave expanding @ c. Ergo: 4th dimension expands @ c & MDT: dx4/dt=ic -from [url] http://twitter.com/45surf[/url] " On Nov 14, 6:27 am, cjcountess <cjcount...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > So are you saying that, sense photons interfere with themselves, > indicating a substructure, that they do indeed, as individials, expand > sphericaly? > > Conrad J Countess
From: cjcountess on 14 Nov 2009 12:48 On Nov 14, 9:27 am, cjcountess <cjcount...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > So are you saying that, sense photons interfere with themselves, > indicating a substructure, that they do indeed, as individials, expand > sphericaly? > > Conrad J Countess Dre this is Conrad Countess again Can you simply answer the question above yes or no? Conrad J Countess By the way, how is it going with the contest, and did anybody win yet?
From: dre on 14 Nov 2009 13:50 On Nov 14, 9:48 am, cjcountess <cjcount...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Nov 14, 9:27 am, cjcountess <cjcount...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > So are you saying that, sense photons interfere with themselves, > > indicating a substructure, that they do indeed, as individials, expand > > sphericaly? > > > Conrad J Countess > > Dre this is Conrad Countess again > > Can you simply answer the question above yes or no? > > Conrad J Countess > > By the way, how is it going with the contest, and did anybody win yet? In its simplest form, a photon propagates as a spherically-symmetric probability wave expanding at c. And yes--a photon's sphecially- symmetic porobability wave interferes with itself. A photon's wave interfers with itself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment When light came to be understood as the result of electrons falling from higher energy orbits to lower energy orbits, the light that is delivered to some surface in any short interval of time came to be understood as ordinarily representing the arrival of very many photons, each with its own wave front. In understanding what actually happens in the two-slit experiment it became important to find out what happens when photons are emitted one by one.[11] When it became possible to perform that experiment, it became apparent that a single photon has its own wave front that passes through both slits, and that the single photon will show up on the detector screen according to the net probability values resulting from the co- incidence of the two probability waves coming by way of the two slits. When a great number of photons are sent through the apparatus one by one and recorded on photographic film, the same interference pattern emerges that had been seen before when many photons were being emitted at the same time. The low intensity double-slit experiment was first performed by Taylor in 1909,[13] by reducing the level of incident light until on average only one photon was being transmitted at a time. [11] Note that it is the probabilities of photons appearing at various points along the detection screen that add or cancel. So if there is a cancellation of waves at some point that does not mean that a photon disappears; it means that the probability of a photon's appearing at that point will disappear, and the probability that it will appear somewhere else increases. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment In its simplest form in free space, a photon is represented by a spherically-symetric probabilistic wavefront. Surely you have heard of Huygens' Principle and Young's Double Slit Experiment? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huygens%E2%80%93Fresnel_principle In relativity a photon remains stationary in the fourth dimension. A photon is timeless and ageless. Surely you have heard of Einstein's Relativity? Can anyone refute any of these proofs? "Simple, logical proofs of MDT: MDT PROOF#1: Relativity tells us that a timeless, ageless photon remains in one place in the fourth dimension. Quantum mechanics tells us that a photon propagates as a spherically-symmetric expanding wavefront at the velocity of c. Ergo, the fourth dimension must be expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, in a spherically-symmetric manner. The expansion of the fourth dimension is the source of nonlocality, entanglement, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, c, relativity, entropy, free will, and all motion, change, and measurement, for no measurement can be made without change. For the first time in the history of relativity, change has been wedded to the fundamental fabric of spacetime in MDT. MDT PROOF#2: Einstein (1912 Man. on Rel.) and Minkowski wrote x4=ict. Ergo dx4/dt=ic. MDT PROOF#3: The only way to stay stationary in the three spatial dimensions is to move at c through the fourth dimension. The only way to stay stationary in the fourth dimension is to move at c through the three spatial dimensions. Ergo the fourth dimension is moving at c relative to the three spatial dimensions. MDT twitter proof (limited to 140 characters): SR: photon is stationary in 4th dimension. QM: photon is probability wave expanding @ c. Ergo: 4th dimension expands @ c & MDT: dx4/dt=ic -from [url] http://twitter.com/45surf[/url] "
From: cjcountess on 14 Nov 2009 15:10
O.K. Dre, I don't know if you are avoiding answering my simple question or not, so I'll ask it in a different way: Do you mean to say that one photon expands in size relative to space sphericaly? And furthermore, what do you think of my idea http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dsn5q6f_101hgtjv9fb&hl=en A summary which can be stated as: 1) Planck discovered E=hf for photons 2) Einstein discovered E=mc^2 for electron's/matter 3) deBroglie discovered (E=hf) = (E=mc^2) for electron and that electron was also a wave. 4) Bohr discovered that the wavelength of electron is equal to circumference of circle with angular momentum of a multiple integer of h/2pi 5) Therefore it follows from this and other evidence, that (E=mc^2) = (E= mc^circled) and c=(square root of -1) Also feel free to ask any questions Conrad J Countess |