E.E. DS Avalon

Here 'tis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_field_entoptic_phenomenon they're the light shining through the spaces in front of large white blood cells randomly stopping while trying to squeeze through tiny capillaries. This momentary halt results in an empty space just ahead in the vessel before the cell again moves with the flow and fills the gap. There are a whole variety of strange things going on in the eye, so to say, that are hiding in plain sight. Once you know how to look at them they become obvious. Otherwise known as Scheerer's phenomenon, 1924. He was an ophthalmologist, so some people took his observation seriously. Other name, 'blue sky sprites' I like that.

I'm looking for direct references two specific double slit variations that have been performed. All I can find are vague 2nd and 3rd hand accounts and references about these. If anyone can help me, I'd sure appreciate it. 1st: a double slit setup was sent to a bunch of different colleges. They each shot one photon through the apparatus onto a separate recording plate, then passed the setup on. When the plates were compiled there was an interference pattern with each photon knowing it's place in the overall pattern, independent of time. 2nd: The double slit wave collapse. I've read that if the measurement that collapses the wave into a a particle pattern is placed after the photon has passed thru the slits you still apparently collapse the function back in time before the split and get a particle/point-like pattern. Somebody asked about these on a public discourse chat. I told him I would ask around to check the veracity of the second claim. Thanks in advance. I'm rather curious about these, myself.

https://www.google.com/search?q=c+to+fahrenheit&source=hp&ei=EA3CY8blEJSU0PEPpqCXmAQ&iflsig=AK50M_UAAAAAY8IbILw-LP1AkHf0m7wix0wKB7LkbwmX&oq=c+to+f&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAEYAzIICAAQgAQQsQMyBQgAEIAEMgUIABCABDILCAAQgAQQsQMQgwEyBQgAEIAEMgUIABCABDIFCAAQgAQyBQgAEIAEMgUIABCABDIFCAAQgAQ6DggAEI8BEOoCEIwDEOUCOg4ILhCPARDqAhCMAxDlAjoOCC4QgAQQsQMQxwEQ0QM6EQguEIAEELEDEIMBEMcBENEDOgsILhCABBDHARDRAzoLCC4QgAQQxwEQrwE6CwguEIAEELEDEIMBOgsILhCxAxDHARDRA1DkCliKG2DrPGgBcAB4AIABR4gBxgKSAQE2mAEAoAEBsAEK&sclient=gws-wiz Conversion calculator. 80C = 176F I see. Thank you. I was using the scale equivalent temperature readings where I should have been using units. I knew there was something wrong, just could identify it. thanks.

This is a word problem, I think. I know I'm doing something wrong along the lines of the bellboy's missing dollar but I don't know where I'm messing up. Could be my physics, or maybe even my gozintas. Can someone help me? Here 'tis: Latent Heat of Fusion ice stated in layman's terms says the following take any quantity of ice, I'll use an ice cube at exactly 0oC and apply exactly enough heat to melt it and you end up with water at 0C. All the energy goes into breaking the molecular bonds and no heat at all is imparted to the substance. Now, if you apply the exact same amount of energy to that 0C water the water will absorb enough heat to raise it 80C. With a thermometer it will read 80C. 80C is 176F. Pretty dang hot. You can even use a thermometer to verify it 80C Now keep in mind that 80C=176F Let's do the same experiment with the Fahrenheit scale. Apply the heat to a 32F ice cube and you get 32f water. Now you pump that same amount worth of additional heat into that water, added heat, and the temperature goes up, increases, by 176F. equals the 80CCelsius experiment. Here's my problem The F scale at which this experiment begins, the temperature at which the frozen ice cube begins it's journey, is already at 32F. If the additional 176 degree rise is added on to that we get 208F which is 98C. Where did the extra 18C come from, or conversely, where did the 0riginal 32F run off to? I haven't performed the experiment so I really don't know what I will end up with. I would imagine the water is at 80C. But. . . What am I doing wrong?