h a l f b a k e r y
Superficial Intelligence

meta:

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

 user: pass:
register,

# photon magnetic particle theory

Simple single vs multiple slit behavior explanation
 (0) [vote for, against]

The photons are particles with a minute but existant electro- magnetic field around them.

Waves are created when the photon fields from one slit interact with other fields of photons from the other streams exiting the other slits, and move the photons off their course. But with a single slit they are leaving the slit as a stream of particles without interacting with any other particles to their side, and so reach a point and do not draw extra stripes.

Think of tiny magnets instead of the iron filings that show the field.

Shooting them through a single slit, they stay in line. Opening two slits causes them to pan out. Is that so hard to understand?

The single stream is held in line by a helical formation of spinning photons. The electromagnetic fields around each photon are locked in a rotating cilinder directed forward similar to what happens vertically in tornado physics or in air and water turbulance. It holds as long as there is no disturbance from adjacent parallel streams.

To check this in water waves, I would use pipes with water exiting in such a formation and see how it behaved at a distance before a single stream dissipated. Then would take multiple pipes and see whether the helixes would break down and turn into the equivalent of a single wave hitting multiple slits.

Another experiment closely resembling my model would be to shoot a stream of small spinning ball magnets from a single pipe, and then shooting them from multiple parallel pipes.

Finally, I would check if my theory holds in the case of sending these tiny spinning magnets on a board with a single slit and with several slits. If the stream of magnets from a single slit would create a single hit-area opposite the slit, I'm quite sure that the multiple slits would cause a wave effect.

Lastly, I would check that there is no effect caused by the multiple slits on the INCOMING particles. Which could enhance or even be the cause of this phenomenon:

Particles directed at my slit being deflected off the tip and not entering it will only affect particles from other slits, prior to or after the slit. So with one slit these deflected particles have no effect, but with more than one slit, the particles affect each other causing waveform interaction patterns.

The elegant Mach Zehnder Interferometer experiment in the two-door exit lecture series and book, could equally be easily understood:

The facts:
Rout 1 RR: (half the photons): Reflected then Reflected.
Rout 2 TR: (half the photons): Transmitted then Reflected.

With a second Beam Splitter:

When the beams are passing through each other, neither beam has any affect on the other, but when hitting a Beam Separator:
1a (RR) - is continuing to D1 as expected.
1b (RR) - seems to continue to D1 instead of being deflected to D2.
2a (TR) - is deflected to D1 as expected.
2b (TR) - seems to be deflected to D1 instead of continuing on to D2.

The key to this would be to understand the "splitter". If there is some pull between the particles like there is in streaming water I could easily build a splitter pipe that when water enters it from the side sends all the output one way, but when receiving only water from one source splits the stream in two, letting half continue straight on and half deflected to a pipe on the side. Nothing mysterious here. It would simply be the opposite of the Bernoulli effect.

 — pashute, Sep 22 2020

Time Traveler's Handbook of 1001 Tense Formations. https://hitchhikers...01_Tense_Formations
Required reading [8th of 7, Sep 22 2020]

Blitz Barbeque Blitz_20Barbeque
An early attempt to try an HB idea in the "Real World" [8th of 7, Sep 23 2020]

//Shooting them through a single slot, they stay in line. Opening two slots causes them to pan out.// - so they know before they leave how many slits there are?
 — hippo, Sep 22 2020

[kdf] - yes, 'wave' and 'particle' are just models; they don't really describe the physical reality
 — hippo, Sep 22 2020

 What the other two said.

 [marked-for-education]



Actually there might only be one of them, capable of manifesting as both [kdf] and [hippo] ...
 — 8th of 7, Sep 22 2020

 Are you sure that's grammatically correct ?

We suggest you consult Dr. Dan Streetmentioner's definitve work on the subject.
 — 8th of 7, Sep 22 2020

Sounds like someone just discovered the double slit experiment.
 — tatterdemalion, Sep 23 2020

//How about it [hippo], do you recall ever being me?//

No, I don't think so, but that doesn't prove anything. It could be that I turn into [kdf] at the full moon and post strange, other-worldly ideas and annotations, eventually waking as [hippo], bathed in sweat, with cracked, broken and bloody fingernails and an acid taste in my mouth and a hazy, fleeting memory of furious typing. If this is true then during these waking hours the [hippo] part of my mind locks away these disturbing and perverse [kdf] memories for its own protection.

Or it could be the other way round - i.e. I might be Mr Hyde, rather than Dr Jekyll
 — hippo, Sep 23 2020

 Edited my hand particling.

 Schrodinger's cat "thought experiment" was meant to prove how WRONG and absurd it is to think that the cat was in some both-alive-and-dead at-the-same-time state.

 He meant us to accept that the cat was alive till some point in time, and dead only after that, and that it was only a problem of our knowledge. (An autopsy for example could give us some clues about how long the cat had been dead).

 I am claiming that we can create the same effect of single vs multiple slits with water or tiny magnets.

(Sorry about the spelling mistale, English is my secondary language. I knew: "I slit a sheet, a sheet I slit. And on the slitted sheet I sit". So I thought that slits were about cutting things and slots were about openings. Professor Avraham Hochberg in his Biochemistry course at the Hebrew U used to ask for native english speakers to read aloud "Beta Pleated Sheet" because, as he explained in Hebrew, he never gets which is which correctly. )
 — pashute, Sep 23 2020

 Some words of warning; previous attempts to prove out some apparently innocuous HB ideas in the "real world" have yielded varying results.

This sounds fairly harmless, mind. Hard to see any obvious way it's going to burn the lab down ...
 — 8th of 7, Sep 23 2020

 Yes, indeed.

 And [pash], you've absolutely no need to worry that other bakers will use your spelling mistakes, limited command of English, or imperfect understanding of basic physics as an excuse to deride and humiliate you.

 We don't need excuses; we do it as Standard Operating Procedure...

<Obligatory faux-Hispanic "Hwee doan' need no steenkeeng hexcuses" parodic misquote/>
 — 8th of 7, Sep 23 2020

Borg do it unanimously.
 — Voice, Sep 24 2020

Does the the skating bubble of coffee move in bound ways because the coffee surface, the field, is the environmental information of the cup?
 — wjt, Sep 26 2020

 “The philosopher Didactylos has summed up an alternative hypothesis as "Things just happen. What the hell".”

(Terry Pratchett)
 — 8th of 7, Sep 26 2020

 //Borg do it unanimously.//

While they're all busy getting it on, who's flying the Cube? How do they get that many species to follow the same libidic rhythm and timing? How do they deal with trisexual species? How many nursing facilities does it take to handle the huge population increase afterwards? So many questions...
 — RayfordSteele, Sep 27 2020

 Two experiments that succeeded in my lab and prove the point:

 1. Take a rotating elastic rod strung through magnetic beads, each bead set in opposing direction to the previous bead, so they repell and stay distant from each other. The rod is only elastic enough to allow "wave" movement, but not for the magnets to pull each other. Rotate the beads on the rods. Now do so for another rod.

 a) Try pulling each rod upwards (like when pulling a fish out of the water with a fishing rod) and notice that the rod of beads, now verticle, stays in a straight line with the beads at first pulling together a bit (during the initial pull) and then bouncing back and forth in a wave movement, but staying in a straight line one behind the other.

 b) Now do the same experiment, bring up two rods, causing a slight interaction between them. In order to keep the interaction small, so that the rods don't pull and attach to each other, try out different distances until the rods don't pull enough to completely connect, but do effect the magnets on the other rod.

 Notice the interference.

 Result explained simply: We have particles (the beads) causing wave interference when interfering with each other, but without a second interference behave as "particles" moving in a straight line.

 The strange part is that there is nothing strange about this, and it is totally intuitive. Which is what I am trying to suggest.

 2. Two lasers each with a slit in front of it, in parallel to each other will create a stripe interference on each of the opposing walls even though there is only one stream of light and only a single slit in each wall. Proof that there is interference from one light stream on the other.

The other more advanced experiments I proposed in the newly edited idea have not been tried, and I doubt that they would fail.
 — pashute, Sep 28 2020

 No, in fact they sound like something [xen] would use on her Discerning Gentlemen Clients, for an additional fee.

 To be fair to [pash], it's just another model; an interpretation of observed phenomena. It can be billiard balls, or pages of equations, but ultimately it's an attempt to describe something that's not directly observable at its fundamental level.

A good predictive model is the best that can be hoped for.
 — 8th of 7, Sep 28 2020

 //A good predictive model is the best that can be hoped for.// Some models are better than others and there is a lot of future.

 Humans are still open to new really deep insight, other new branches of mathematics, new technology, and advancement in computer data processing. Well, advancement of ingenuity and imagination of the human mind in general.

Then again, I suppose something could be designed, refined, used and abused without knowing the underlying mechanics that makes the stuff do what it is doing so long as it does the necessary when called upon in the conditions needed. That spacetime grip drive people are proposing, comes to mind.
 — wjt, Oct 10 2021

 [annotate]

back: main index