michel123456

O.K. If I put a water pipe around the laser stream, does that change the experiment? I don't think so. We know that the photon has been emitted from the laser. Point A. We know that the photon passed through one or the 2 slits. Point B. We know that the photon hit the screnn somewhere. Point C No matter the real or quantic way, path, wave or how-do-you-call-that, we know that tthe photon went through points A B C. My question is the following: When points A B C are not aligned, the photon must have changed direction, no?

Before hitting the shield, the sum of all photons are restrained into the stream of the laser, no? I mean if you put a screen anywhere else in the room out of range of the laser, the screen will detect no photon.

Ok. But after it has hit the plate, you can make estimation about its path. There are several possible situations: Schematically 1. the photon passed through the left slit exactly and hit the plate in a straight path 2. the photon passed through the right slit exactly and hit the plate in a straight path 3. the photon hit the plate outside the direct straight path (it is far left or far right). In this case it is believed that the photon has interfere with itself. In red all the paths I could figure. 4. the photon does not hit the plate because it is believed that it has interfere with itself and acting as a wave it has destroyed its own. My question is: in situation 3 and 4 above, what is the thing that made the photon changes its direction? Why has the photon changed its path when going out of the slit?

So you say that when shooting with a laser a REAL black surface, you will observe no dot? The Amazon river has a width of several kilometers. The divided stream in nanoseconds wets several kilometers of width. That is what you observe. Does that mean that a droplet of water can wet several kilometers?

[out of the subject] I don't believe that is correct. When I use a laser beam and light a black surface, I observe a red dot (my laser is red). If I can observe a red dot, that means some photons have bounced back to my retina. And since I can observe the red dot from any point in the rooom, it means photons have bounced in all directions.[out of the subject] here i will use an analogy: You want to study a drop of water. But for some mysterious reason you are not able to study drops of water, the only thing you have at your disposal is the Amazon river. You know from your Theory that a drop of water must have a xx charachteristic. So you study the xx charachteristic of the entire flow of the Amazon river and divide it by a very very (very) small interval of time such that the result corresponds at the xx charachteristic of a drop of water. But do you obtain a real drop of water? Or something unphysical which is a tiny flow of water over the entire width of the Amazon? IOW, are you really sure that you are looking at a single photon? That happens when you try to measure at the slit, IOW when you intercept or disturb the photon at the slit. Does that also happen when you shoot surely at one slit? Then at the other?

You are influenced by the known result of the experiment. The photon path is a straight line. Does the laser shoot randomly? In different directions? So that the light ray one time goes through the left slit, the other time through the right slit, the next time bounces back because it misses the slits?

But when you shoot one photon at a time? Does the light ray of a single photon illuminate both slits?

Ah. Then i understand that a single photon is considered as a line (a straigth path) In this case, how does it come out that the scientist does not know where the photon goes (in the left or right slit) The photon goes where the laser is pointed to. No? If the laser is pointed to the left slit, there goes the photon. If the laser is pointed to the right slit, the photon goes there. Or do I miss something?

Sorry I ment You mean that a single elementary particle like a photon is a macroscopic flow with a measurable thickness?

The earliest star in the Universe belongs to our galaxy. http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2014/researchers-identify-one-of-the-earliest-stars-in-the-universe-0209.html SMSS J031300.36-670839.3. No comment, for info only.

I don't get it. You mean that an elementary particlelike a photon is a macroscopic flow with a measurable thickness?

Distance to city is not always a bad factor. you can imagine your airport mainly for freight and low cost companies. A distance of 40 km is possible (Like Milan Malpensa IIRC). I don't know where to find marine maps that show depths. But i read on Wikipedia that the coast North of the port has been severely eroded because of the construction of the port itself. It means the water must be shallow there, and that could be an argument to restore the coast approx. as it was. i think with some good search you can do a great job.

That's all O.K. What does not change is the thickness. For better understanding, as it appear on my screen, the scale of the image in post#10 corresponds approximatively to 1 mm equal to a meter. And also a regular sheet of printer paper is 3 times thicker than what is shown on the drawing.

In this case you should provide a marine map that shows depths or it will become unrealistic too. _______________________ I had a look in google Earth and saw a beautiful lake north of Chennai. That is wonderful for an airport - very awful for the birds. That would drive completely mad the ecologists. Maybe on the south shore of the lake? (sorry i don't know the exact situation so maybe I am utterly wrong) On the other hand I see that Chennai airport is surrounded by urbanization. That's not good in the long run.

But you still have some kind of flow I presume. I mean the ray of light has a thickness comparable to the distance between the slits, no?

If the existing airport is maintained there is no other choice than to build the new one parallel to it. If the shore disagrees, that's a problem. Since it is a simple exercise without too much relation with real life, maybe you can decide that the ancien airport will be discarded (changed into a green area or urban & touristic development) and take your airport as the only one. That's what is happening here. It was specified in the convention between the Greek state & the construction development that no other aviation activity would be allowed at the ancient airport (in order to provide a - costly- monopole).

Thank you for the info So, if I made no mistake with the lot of zero's, here is a section at scale I took the smallest figures: One frame with width of slits 0.03 mm Distance between centers of slits 0.06 mm. It is supposed that the thickness is equal to the width, that is 0.03 mm The large square in the center is the gap between the 2 slits. The little square in the left slit represents a square of wavelength 532nm.

No you wrote "between centers of slits" not between edges of slits.

Only over the Net, never in real life. What is this frame made of? What's its thickness?

O.K. You should begin finding a location. Is it about Mumbai or Chennai ? Then take an existing design (as you stated) and put it at the right scale on the map. Take care of the correct orientation (the orientation of the existing airport should be the correct one but you have to check out). try to find a place where the sea bed is not too deep (is there a small island nearby?). Then figure if it is possible to link the new airport to the city. The easiest way is to create the airport "on the beach" IOW parallel to the coast and in full contact. The other way is to put it anywhere but with a bridge for roads & trains. Don't forget that airports are for people AND for merchandises. Also be aware of the existing air traffic control and the existing path of airplanes directing or coming from the existing airport. Keep in mind that your airport will be an addition to the existing one, another reason to put it in a parallel direction. That would be a good start. Ah, also it may happen that such a study already exists. The newly build Athens airport existed in projects in the 60's. ------------------------- (edit) Do you quit the skyscraper?

i missed your point. _____________ Side note: the Greek philosophers did not stay on the Acropolis that housed temples. They stood anywhere else, those in Athens sometimes in Platon's Academy about 3 km far from the Acropolis.

well I was wondering about the details. I know that last experiments shoot photons one by one. How do you do that in practice: I don;t understand where the photon is shooted at? or is it not a ray? but something like an horizontal plane of light shooted at the vertical slits? Or if it is a ray indeed (a line) why do scientists say that they cannot know through which slit pass the photon? Or is the ray of light thicker than the 2 slits aperture? Has anyone a good description of the experiment? Thanks.

I hope there is no fight. IMHO if churches of all kind could make a step aside and consider their own sacred scriptures as a poor human translation of divine words instead of a literal transcription, that would make a better world. I think it is possible to accept human mistakes without interfering with faith. There are also examples of scientists who believe. To speak frankly, I get the very strong impression that the Big Bang Theory complies with religions of all sorts. A theory of the Universe without creation would be much more difficult to be accepted by the scientific community for this reason only.

I disagree with the option that 'time is an illusion". What is that "t" that you find in so many equations? When someone comes up to meters, there is no problem, everyone understands clearly what a meter is. But when it comes to Time, then there is a problem. I hear nowhere people arguing that "space is an illusion". To me, the statement 'time is an illusion" corresponds to a defeat of our understanding.

Yes. http://books.google.gr/books?id=a2-XlKZAIU8C&pg=PA22&lpg=PA22&dq=And+first+of+the+Macrocephali+or+Long-heads;+a+Nation+whose+Heads+are+different+from+all+the+world.&source=bl&ots=XaFYBJI2-4&sig=1GT9CBHvD_7sG8zk1b0xVR95Hu8&hl=el&sa=X&ei=NFf3UvvMLMzY0QXm6oDoCA&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=And%20first%20of%20the%20Macrocephali%20or%20Long-heads%3B%20a%20Nation%20whose%20Heads%20are%20different%20from%20all%20the%20world.&f=false --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Correct. You win http://doubtfulnews.com/2014/02/foerster-pye-and-ketchum-collaborate-paracas-elongated-skull-exposed-its/