Just confirms that all known laws of physics are only approximations applicable at relatively large scale. .
Just confirms that all known laws of physics are only approximations.... fundamentally wrong.
in my opinion the "photon" is an outdated model. perhaps a photon is just a ripple of energy. Its not like you can have a pile of photons ...
in my opinion the "photon" is an outdated model.
in my opinion the "photon" is an outdated model.
You're not too far off. The real problem is the word 'particle' in the colloquial sense ... They are, in fact, 'ripples of energy' (energy-carrying excitations of some quantum field; in the case of photons, the EM field).
Particle in the more modern sense means that there is a discrete 'ripple' (wave packet, if you will) that carries momentum and energy.
travel through space arranged in discrete, tight helical paths
Whyde's talking about polarization. It's actually a fairly astute point.travel through space arranged in discrete, tight helical pathsMaybe you imagine that to be the case but it's no part of established scientific theory on the matter.
This is interesting, but it appears what is happening is that the researchers have increased the probabilities of additional paths through the grid. It does not seem to help answer why, when single photons pass through the grid, they still show interference. Am I wrong?I won't say wrong, I'll say incorrect. The experiment actually uses single photons. You wouldn't know that from reading the article; you have to go read the paper and examine the experimental setup; it also helps if you've seen writeups of the DCQE (which I strongly recommend you familiarize yourself with if you're interested enough to be asking this question). You got a 5 from me despite being incorrect for asking a good question.
The silly graphics with this article that show photons swerving round corners in free space will only encourage loonies to create their own pseudo science interpretations.Actually it turns out that the photons swerve around corners in free space due to the excitation of surface plasmons in the gold slit assembly and their interaction with the photons.
The text is also unclear whether the interference differs from that expected from compounded wave refractions at the slits?The interference terms are carefully calculated using numerical simulation of the Maxwell equations. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "compounded wave refractions at the slits," so I can't say whether this might be tantamount to the plasmon effects.
travel through space arranged in discrete, tight helical paths
Maybe you imagine that to be the case but it's no part of established scientific theory on the matter.
I'd rather say that the concept of "particle" in quantum mechanics is not really very much like the concept of "particle" in classical physics; in quantum mechanics, "particles" have wavelike characteristics that are absent in the classical concept of "particle."
"Quantum" takes the whole thing in, but is resistant to our imagination since we do not encounter quanta in everyday existence.
Choose your poison.
LOL, I usually don't read RealityCheck's stuff, but "plasmonic/near-field effects are crucial 'common factor' in all 'slit-type' experiment physics/results" is a real classic.
Jargon generator: http://www.scifii...nerator/
Maybe not quite as good as RC's! Hee hee...
...it says "the researchers employed a different kind of interferometer that makes use of plasmonics". I.e. Most interferometers DO NOT make us of plasmonics.How can anyone purporting to have objective intellect and be following the scientific method be so patently obtuse/in-denial as you are being, RNP? Maybe the brainwashing has affected you beyond reversal, as is explained in the following observation re 'publication bias: http://phys.org/n...lse.html
LOL, I usually don't read RealityCheck's stuff, but "plasmonic/near-field effects are crucial 'common factor' in all 'slit-type' experiment physics/results" is a real classic.Mate, don't you EVER learn to keep your mouth shut when you are TOTALLY IGNORANT of what's been going on around you? You keep sounding-off egotistically/nastily at ME, yet it has been YOU that didn't know about plasmoids in our Sun, non-Keplerian orbital regimes wherever non-solar-system-like mass distributions occur (such as in spiral galaies) etc! It has been ME that has educated YOU over the years because YOU were NOT UP TO SPEED in your reading avbout things which you knew NOTHING about, yet pontificated, bashed/insulted others despite YOU being the one woefully unprepared/incorrect in your own arrogance/ignorance yet being so 'certain' you were 'right'. :)
Jargon generator: http://www.scifii...nerator/
Maybe not quite as good as RC's! Hee hee...
Nil desperandum!...There are still scientists of integrity/objectivity around....as the newer mainstream discoveries/reviews attest to. :)
Well said, RC!He does have the way with words, eh?
Keep it up!What it is Cher? You think after 10 years he might leave up hanging? Non, keeping it up is all he knows how to do. Laissez les bons temps rouler
Well said, RC! Keep it up!No problem, mate. I'm merely serving the true scientists and scientific method; whilst that Ira-bot-voting-ignoramus 'defends' his 'preferred science Skippys', despite he and they seeming to be totally unaware of the objectivity and integrity principles which the scientific method/true scientists dictates/follow. Never mind, they are and will remain irrelevant 'noisemakers', nasty and distracting yes, but irrelevant in the end.
And you ignore SALIENT SCIENTIFICALLY KNOWN points:
- the plasmonics/near-filed effects are ALWAYS THERE in slit-surface topologies/configurations!
What prevents an infinite loop occurring...?
Thanks @Da Schneib and @antialiasMate, you would do well to get ALL the REAL background facts before kneejerk to acceptance of what issues from your 'heroes' here.
I'm merely serving the true scientists and scientific method
See what I mean about not having all the facts, yet attacking those who do?while refusing to accept even the basic requirements of the scientific method of validating your claim with evidence
to skew the discussion/metrics on a science sitescience is about being able to prove a valid scientific point with evidence
@RC, after you said "plasmonic/near-field effects are crucial 'common factor' in all 'slit-type' experiment physics/results" it was over. What you can never stand is to have your technobabble exposed. The fact that you insist on making fake-condescending posts afterward simply proves I'm right: you're a poser.You keep conveniently failing to mention that I have been CORRECT all along, despite your not understanding and calling it "technobabble".
I am not an expert in all aspects of physics
I HAVE been explaining over YEARS; but 'usual crowd' was ignoring/dismissing it!You must not be doing a good job explaining him. I been seeing you do this explaining for years and still have not seen you bring someone around
I will explain ALL in my COMPLETE ToE publication.You still fantasizing about that? Do you dress up in a lab coat while you pretending how much fun it would be to really be able to be the scientist?
It's called the path integral approach. As you'd know if you actually knew anything about physics.The love of jargon blinds to the actual mening in physical terms as distinct from abstract maths-analytical construct terms. Haven't you learned these lessons yet? The 'abstract map' is NOT the 'actual physical territory'.
There isn't any publication bias in an experiment.That is a separate issue. The 'publication bias' problem relates to publishing/treating hypotheses etc as if they were 'facts'.
The path integral formulation of quantum mechanics is not "jargon."You're so easily bored/distracted by/from the real physical insights, and prefer your abstraction/jargon based arguments while missing the actual physical reality being explained to you. Why keep doing this? You used those same distraction/irrelevant tactics during those other times when I was correct all along and you incorrect all along yet accusing me of being a 'liar' and 'making stuff up' etc etc. Does it ever enter your ego-driven mind that you are just plain trolling your ego-based 'tactics' while missing the real science being pointed out for your benefit? Do you, and all those other ego-driven types never learn? Didn't the lessons from Bicep2, and all the other instances when I tried to put you on the path to the correct science, not get through at all?
An experiment is not a hypothesis.
This grows boring.
Hi Forum.
Note how the Ira-bot-voting ignoramus BLAH, BLAH and a few more BLAHS that everybody already seen.
Even more povre are those that have so little integrity of character/intellect that they attack those who have been correct all along and instead prefer to give that bot-voting ignoramus '5s' to help him 'hide' the site discussion/posts via readers' 'filters' by skewing the ratings metrics. Sad.You tell the GREAT BIG LIE Skippy. I did not do any of you volumetrifications. I skewered you/RC/Really/Skippy/Sam/troll/Fedora/Earthman of the Earthman Playhouse. (But if I could volumetricate, I would sure do that to you Cher.)
The reason for this is explained in my ToE as detailed in "The Situation of Gravity".then considering your abject failure to sell it to reputable science and it's free electronic dissemination, you should now be easily able to link and show the evidence for:
Hi Da Schneib. :)continuing your trend of making claims without evidence, this makes 6,067 posts with no evidence or ability to validate your claims
@RC and @RegWhy would I want to collaborate with anyone else? I have already worked for decades to COMPLETE the Cosmological Theory; starting 'from scratch' with reality-based (not maths/metaphysics based as do other theories) axioms/postulates; covering the FULL range of physical phenomena ranging from 'infinitesimal' to 'infinite' scale, in a continuously consistent manner.
Maybe you two could work on your ToE's together so that we can quit doing science and just read your combined paper that will explain everything.
@RC and @Reg
Maybe you two could work on your ToE's together so that we can quit doing science and just read your combined paper that will explain everything.
Thanks in advance
Reg Mundy
Jan 6, 2017