Young's Double Slit

[RICHARDBATTY]

Guns ready, fingers steady. I'm going on a fly by. Prepare to shoot me down in flames. The waves travel at the speed of light. At this speed time freezes for the wave and an infinite amount of time passes for the wave. The wave is in the distant future before it reaches the target. Observation cannot take place over an infinite time and in one instant. The measurement takes place at one instant and from the instant the observation was taken the outcome is already a known future for the particle. At the instant of observation the wave cannot be viewed as it has occured over time for us. As time for the wave does not exist at no point can it be any where along its given path but it does exist and if we observe it it can only exist at that point. The point that it exists is in the future when its state has been recorded as an image. If we did not observe it, it would not have to exist at a given point and could be a wave.

[[Tycho?]]

Guns ready, fingers steady. I'm going on a fly by. Prepare to shoot me down in flames. The waves travel at the speed of light. At this speed time freezes for the wave and an infinite amount of time passes for the wave. The wave is in the distant future before it reaches the target. Observation cannot take place over an infinite time and in one instant. The measurement takes place at one instant and from the instant the observation was taken the outcome is already a known future for the particle. At the instant of observation the wave cannot be viewed as it has occured over time for us. As time for the wave does not exist at no point can it be any where along its given path but it does exist and if we observe it it can only exist at that point. The point that that it exists is in the future when its state has been recorded as an image. If we did not observe it, it would not have to exist at a given point and could be a wave.

 

It sounds like you just made that up.

[RICHARDBATTY]

'']It sounds like you just made that up.

That transparent was it.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I read this in a Dilbert book, but slightly different. Supposedly they changed it so the sensors deleted the data after the experiment was done. Then it changed, so they thought that information in the future can change the past. Then he says the conscious part of the brain only activates AFTER you do something, and he gives the example that you're pricked with a pin and you jump before you think about it. But you say "I was pricked by a pin, then I jumped" and somehow he makes it sound like you changed the past.

Reflexes, anyone?

Could it possibly be that the detectors create a magnetic field that mess up the experiment?

[ydoaPs]

source: "The Elegant Universe" by Brian Greene.

 

what chapter? i want to check it out.

[Primarygun]

Which did Young Thomas support?

[TheProphet]

Guns ready, fingers steady. I'm going on a fly by. Prepare to shoot me down in flames. The waves travel at the speed of light. At this speed time freezes for the wave and an infinite amount of time passes for the wave. The wave is in the distant future before it reaches the target. Observation cannot take place over an infinite time and in one instant. The measurement takes place at one instant and from the instant the observation was taken the outcome is already a known future for the particle. At the instant of observation the wave cannot be viewed as it has occured over time for us. As time for the wave does not exist at no point can it be any where along its given path but it does exist and if we observe it it can only exist at that point. The point that it exists is in the future when its state has been recorded as an image. If we did not observe it, it would not have to exist at a given point and could be a wave.

 

Nicely put.. This shure is what i have comed to conclude to! Makes most sense to me!

And what did he really Make up Here Tycho? His specualation originated form a well known fact, and like many others including mysleve whom have comed to the same conclusion! I think it fits like the hand in the glow

[RICHARDBATTY]

As this seems to prove I'm not insane could I have certificate to prove it please. Mr Thales could you help here, you seem to have the knowledge to pick this apart. Basicly the wave would normaly interact with its destination. It has stopped. There is no paradox. When we observe without stopping the wave this creates a temporal paradox that is unresolved until the observation is acknowledged in a perminant way. If the data is deleted before it is acknowledged all that remains of the paradox is energy which can be changed by time.

I do not mean to disrespect anyone elses knowledge of this subject, but I have had more dealings with Mr Thales.

[5614]

what you are uncovering here is the:

"is light a wave or a particle" debate

there is already a thread on it, however it was no-where near as good as i thought it might be.... although admitedly, i havent looked at it for a bit, just search for it.

i always thought, couldnt light be a wave of particles?

[RICHARDBATTY]

Could this mean that the theory of go back in time go forward to an alternative future dimension is wrong.

 

If you have just joined this thread please read the first post.

[RICHARDBATTY]

what you are uncovering here is the:

"is light a wave or a particle" debate

there is already a thread on it' date=' however it was no-where near as good as i thought it might be.... although admitedly, i havent looked at it for a bit, just search for it.

i always thought, couldnt light be a wave of particles?[/quote'] I had thought about particle waves but it would negate the dual out come I would think.

[Thales]

Okies, well the first problem I see with your reasoning is you have adopted a relativistic framework for photons, which as someone aptly pointed out to me(can't remember who) is problematic to say the least. A particle with speed c does not see the universe shrink down to a point or see time stop because the laws of special relativity apply only to inertial refernce frames and a photon has zero mass and therefore no inertia and therefore does not adhere to lorentz transforms(time dialation and length contraction).

 

However you are certainly employing an abstract chain of thought to what is the problematic situation of wave/particle duality, which is encouraging. The way I view this conudrum is that it arises from the way it is measured. If you look for a particle you will see a particle, if you look for a wave you see a wave. I think it is a paradox that arises from the lack of understanding of the nature of subatomic particles which we assume to know so much about.

 

For instance, what we consider to be a dimensionless photon may actually be, the peak of a wavelet which is spread over a larger area. In this sense the space-time is much more interconnected (thus my nick) and the interaction of photons over seemingly disconnected distances is an illusion born out of the simplistic quantisation of what we can observe.

[RICHARDBATTY]

From Thales [ "Okies, well the first problem I see with your reasoning is you have adopted a relativistic framework for photons, which as someone aptly pointed out to me(can't remember who) is problematic to say the least. A particle with speed c does not see the universe shrink down to a point or see time stop because the laws of special relativity apply only to inertial refernce frames and a photon has zero mass and therefore no inertia and therefore does not adhere to lorentz transforms(time dialation and length contraction)."]

 

I thought that sr says that c is the same in all frames and also transformations can only occur with varying speed. Light just is at c therefore cannot be transformed. There may be no contraction of mass but time still does not exist for the wave.

 

As I have stated previously I have no science education so if I argue I'm not saying anyone is wrong. I just try to offer alternative angles to cover all possibilities.

[fermions]

hello, I want to ask another thing here... if we place an magnetic field between the screen and the silts... the interference patterns will still form but it'll be shifted right?

so why doesn't a magnetic field destroy the interference pattern?

 

thanks

[TheProphet]

Okies' date=' well the first problem I see with your reasoning is you have adopted a relativistic framework for photons, which as someone aptly pointed out to me(can't remember who) is problematic to say the least. A particle with speed c does not see the universe shrink down to a point or see time stop because the laws of special relativity apply only to inertial refernce frames and a photon has zero mass and therefore no inertia and therefore does not adhere to lorentz transforms(time dialation and length contraction).

 

However you are certainly employing an abstract chain of thought to what is the problematic situation of wave/particle duality, which is encouraging. The way I view this conudrum is that it arises from the way it is measured. If you look for a particle you will see a particle, if you look for a wave you see a wave. I think it is a paradox that arises from the lack of understanding of the nature of subatomic particles which we assume to know so much about.

 

For instance, what we consider to be a dimensionless photon may actually be, the peak of a wavelet which is spread over a larger area. In this sense the space-time is much more interconnected (thus my nick) and the interaction of photons over seemingly disconnected distances is an illusion born out of the simplistic quantisation of what we can observe.[/quote']

 

I've been reasoning somwwhere alike on this topic earlier on, but still i found SR aplication to the Photons (in my own philosophical way) to be quite neat! I belive i have written something liek richerdbatty in another thread! But still i belive as u say Thales: To little is uncovered and that QM is a not quite the full explenation neither. There is something more to it, altough yet we can only specualate about it! Altough SR did set a limit of everything.. But in order for anything to travel at c in needs to have no mass, so SR in this case contradicts itself a bit.. which to me is just a little missundarstanding.. Hope u follow me to this point.. Have this huge headace tocay

[RICHARDBATTY]

I read this in a Dilbert book' date=' but slightly different. Supposedly they changed it so the sensors deleted the data after the experiment was done. Then it changed, so they thought that information in the future can change the past. Then he says the conscious part of the brain only activates AFTER you do something, and he gives the example that you're pricked with a pin and you jump before you think about it. But you say "I was pricked by a pin, then I jumped" and somehow he makes it sound like you changed the past.

Reflexes, anyone?

Could it possibly be that the detectors create a magnetic field that mess up the experiment?[/quote']

Photons don't interact with magnetic fields as they have no charge.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

This was with electrons, not photons.

[Thales]

Let me ask you this then;

 

If time doesn't exist for the photons then how come light takes billions of years to reach us from billions of light years away?

 

It seems as though you are implying that time and distance are illusions created by travelling sub-c.

 

and;

 

What speed would photons see other photons traveling at if the speed of light is constant for their reference frame?

[RICHARDBATTY]

This was with electrons, not photons.

Yes it was but I meant that the experiment has been done with photons. The experiment with electrons was also repeated to cover all possibilities. It was performed with the detecters on in two tests and different results were gathered. The only difference was that the information recorded on the computer(to remove human intervention) was erased before the the results were viewed.

[RICHARDBATTY]

Let me ask you this then;

 

If time doesn't exist for the photons then hoe come light takes billions of years to reach us from billions of light years away?

 

It seems as though you are implying that time and distance are illusions created by travelling sub-c.

 

and;

 

What speed would photons see other photons traveling at if the speed of light is constant for their reference frame?

I meant that from the photon/electrons point of view the journey is instant and therefore light would not see other light travel.

[Thales]

I meant that from the photon/electrons point of view the journey is instant and therefore light would not see other light travel.

 

But if it doesn't see the other light travel then the speed of light is not the same for all observers?

 

Why would it be instantaneous? If time dilation did apply to photons(which it doesn't) then it would take forever not an instant.

[RICHARDBATTY]

This is where every thing goes a bit Pamela Anderson sun bathing. If the photon has no time then no time passes it experinces no time passing so it is still moving with no time. This is why the speed of light is constant. No matter which frame you view from there is no time to dilate more or less. If a photon could view another photon it has no time c is still constant but no time passes. Hold the sanity certificate.

[Aeschylus]

I meant that from the photon/electrons point of view the journey is instant and therefore light would not see other light travel.

 

Photons do not have refrence frames, we cannot talk about what a photon sees.

[RICHARDBATTY]

Photons do not have refrence frames, we cannot talk about what a photon sees.

Photons don't have eyes either. It was just a hypo question I think. To all observing frames it is the same.

[TheProphet]

Thales: Let me put it this way! Light don't come to a halt due to Getting one of the 4 dimensions to stop. To me Light will still be able to travel all 3 spatial(do one say so?) dimensions but not time*. Time don't pass, but since the Photons still is traveling at c and only can travel att c they will keep moving in it's direction and in Space but not time! Since SR says that c is the limit and that at c Time halts. But i wouldn't say that u should aply moire of SR:s effect to this than the above statement. Since all other SR effects involve mater (might be on shallow ice here, i know )

 

And i also find Light specific abilitys to be somewhat go hand in hand with all the benefits of traveling att c. Once created you are! Nothing can really happen to you, or atleast until you interact again. Just like the perfect energy bearer it really is!

 

*Altough indications say that even light deviate time upp and down a tad. But to in the Long run Cancel out eachothers differences. Slightly speculative altough said by Bigger names than me.

 

All for now folks, need some sleep now!