Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #590803 > unrolled thread

Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? ken quirici <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-26 06:05 -0700
    Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-26 07:12 -0700
      Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? ken quirici <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-26 08:36 -0700
        Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 15:10 -0500
      Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 09:39 -0700
    Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2016-07-26 11:46 -0400
    Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? pcardinale@volcanomail.com - 2016-07-26 10:38 -0700
      Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? ken quirici <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-26 12:23 -0700
        Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? pcardinale@volcanomail.com - 2016-07-26 17:05 -0700
          Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? ken quirici <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-26 19:10 -0700
            Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 07:29 -0500
              Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-07-27 22:15 -0700
                Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 09:28 -0500
                  Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-07-29 10:36 -0700
            Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 09:37 -0700
      Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-26 20:04 +0000
      Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 22:48 -0700
        Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-27 13:29 +0000
          Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-07-27 09:01 -0700
            Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? ken quirici <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-27 09:30 -0700
              Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? ken quirici <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-27 09:40 -0700
            Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-27 19:13 +0000
              Young's two-pinhole moire' noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 17:25 -0700
          just say, no, thank you noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 12:00 -0700
          Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-07-27 22:11 -0700
          Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-07-31 00:48 -0700
      Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-07-29 10:51 -0700
      Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-07-31 00:46 -0700
    Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 22:31 +0200
      Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? ken quirici <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-26 14:01 -0700
        Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 16:38 -0500
          Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 22:57 -0700
            Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-07-26 23:31 -0700
              Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-07-27 04:28 -0700
    Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 14:23 -0500
      sumably, pre- noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 14:01 -0700
      Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? B Gates <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-07-28 19:35 -0400
        Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 18:43 -0700
          Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 09:29 -0700
            Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? brandonahenley9@gmail.com - 2016-07-29 12:04 -0700
              Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 12:29 -0700
          Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? B Gates <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-07-29 17:06 -0400
            Light: a history noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-31 18:38 -0700
        Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 07:29 -0500
          Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? B Gates <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-07-29 17:03 -0400
            Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 16:06 -0500
              Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? B Gates <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-07-29 20:13 -0400
                Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 12:44 -0500
                  Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-30 17:56 -0400
                Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 12:45 -0500
                  Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-30 17:58 -0400
          Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? B Gates <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-07-29 17:10 -0400
            Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 16:15 -0500
              Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? B Gates <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-07-29 20:25 -0400
                Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 12:47 -0500
                  Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-30 18:00 -0400
                    Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-31 14:02 -0500
      Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-07-30 18:05 -0400
        Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-30 18:41 -0400
          Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? ken quirici <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-31 12:24 -0700
            Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-31 14:33 -0500
              Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-08-01 03:32 -0700
          Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-31 14:27 -0500
            Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-08-01 03:29 -0700
              can you read that noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 12:12 -0700
                Re: can you read that Michael J. Strickland <michael06582@comcast.net> - 2016-08-08 08:29 -0400
                  Re: can you read that noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-08-08 15:22 -0700
                    t.h.a.t noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-08-09 12:33 -0700
        Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-07-31 01:00 -0700
        Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-31 14:26 -0500
          Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-07-31 17:12 -0400
            Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-31 17:09 -0500
          Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-08-01 03:35 -0700
        Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-31 18:34 -0700
    Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 08:07 +0200
      Re: Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 12:10 -0700

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#590803 — Can a single photon create an interference pattern in a double-slit experiment?

I would have to surmise that the answer is Yes if the experiment in physical dimensions sufficiently small. Which answer makes me more comfortable with the quantum-theoretic view of reality.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#590805

Ken. You sort of have the right answer. But for the wrong reasons. Look at  this link...

https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=_KekfbrzO74

Photons are a fabrication devised by Elvis Einstein. They do not exist. 
Waves can interfere with each other and be recorded doing so at detectors.
Only  idiots assume this pattern has been created by particles of light.
Being a mathematician and thus,.. an incompetent physicist, Albert needed
attention and made up photons. Which of course attracted the attention 
of incompetent mathematicians the world over. Like Bore, and Heisenbored.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#590811

On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 10:12:06 AM UTC-4, jay moseley wrote:
> Ken. You sort of have the right answer. But for the wrong reasons. Look at  this link...
> 
> https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=_KekfbrzO74
> 
> Photons are a fabrication devised by Elvis Einstein. They do not exist. 
> Waves can interfere with each other and be recorded doing so at detectors.
> Only  idiots assume this pattern has been created by particles of light.
> Being a mathematician and thus,.. an incompetent physicist, Albert needed
> attention and made up photons. Which of course attracted the attention 
> of incompetent mathematicians the world over. Like Bore, and Heisenbored.

Jay. I think we share a similar discomfort with certain modern physical views, but I'm fully prepared to accept an explanation if there was one presented. Assuming I could understand it.

For example, the Wikipedia article on  "Double-Slit Experiment" seems a little skimpy on an actual physical explanation of what's going on.

I think part of the problem is that quantum physics accepts the math and doesn't bother so much with the, well, the physics. They are buttressed in this attitude by the fact that the math actually describes everything, but doesn't really explain it. Unless you have that kind of intuition, which I don't. If you don't, sometimes it's hard to accept that it exists, since it's in somebody else's head and not really accessible. Unless they explain it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#590852

On 7/26/2016 10:36 AM, ken quirici wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 10:12:06 AM UTC-4, jay moseley wrote:
>> Ken. You sort of have the right answer. But for the wrong reasons. Look at  this link...
>>
>> https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=_KekfbrzO74
>>
>> Photons are a fabrication devised by Elvis Einstein. They do not exist.
>> Waves can interfere with each other and be recorded doing so at detectors.
>> Only  idiots assume this pattern has been created by particles of light.
>> Being a mathematician and thus,.. an incompetent physicist, Albert needed
>> attention and made up photons. Which of course attracted the attention
>> of incompetent mathematicians the world over. Like Bore, and Heisenbored.
>
> Jay. I think we share a similar discomfort with certain modern physical views, but I'm fully
> prepared to accept an explanation if there was one presented. Assuming I could understand it.
>
> For example, the Wikipedia article on  "Double-Slit Experiment" seems a little skimpy on an
> actual physical explanation of what's going on.
>
> I think part of the problem is that quantum physics accepts the math and doesn't bother so much
> with the, well, the physics. They are buttressed in this attitude by the fact that the math
> actually describes everything, but doesn't really explain it. Unless you have that kind of
> intuition, which I don't. If you don't, sometimes it's hard to accept that it exists, since it's
> in somebody else's head and not really accessible. Unless they explain it.
>

I think you'll find that free web pages like Wikipedia are not written 
to explain concepts. They are often too dense and terse to do that well, 
and so you are likely to get frustrated in using those kinds of 
resources. Worse, though, would be thinking that if the explanation 
you're looking for isn't in the free web resources you're perusing, then 
the explanation isn't available at all. This leads to the mistaken view 
you describe above, that physicists rely on math solely without having a 
conceptual basis.

I could explain this, but I honestly think you'll do better by reading a 
couple of thin books by Feynman: 1) The Character of Physical Law, and 
2) QED. It's not hard to understand, but it takes some real estate to 
explain the concepts plainly.

Feynman, by the way, once famously said that "Nobody really understands 
quantum mechanics." However, this is a bit of a self-deprecating 
comment, because he's done more to make quantum mechanics intuitively 
understandable than most, as you'll see in those books.


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#590816

On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 5:12:06 PM UTC+3, jay moseley wrote:
> Ken. You sort of have the right answer. But for the wrong reasons. Look at  this link...
> 
> https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=_KekfbrzO74
> 
> Photons are a fabrication devised by Elvis Einstein. They do not exist. 
> Waves can interfere with each other and be recorded doing so at detectors.
> Only  idiots assume this pattern has been created by particles of light.
> Being a mathematician and thus,.. an incompetent physicist, Albert needed
> attention and made up photons. Which of course attracted the attention 
> of incompetent mathematicians the world over. Like Bore, and Heisenbored.
====================
and now some news even for you :
E= hf
IS NOT THE RIGHT FORMULA FOR THE REAL SINGLE PHOTON!!
IT IS THE FORMULA FOR 
A HUGE BUNDLE OF SIMGLE  PHOTONS 
THE REAL ENERGY OF THE SINGLE PHOTON IS 
E min = h f times n
while
0> n <<<< 1.0000 
old copyright by 
Y.Porat
2
the mass (yes mass yrs the only mass 
of the single photon is 
about
exp - 90  Kilogram !!!!
-----
no one will ever 
 be able (even )   just to  *** detect it** !!!
old  Copyright 
3
if you don't understand it
just ask !!
========================
Eng
Yehiel Porat 

TIA
Y.Porat
==================================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#590812

On 26/07/2016 9:05 AM, ken quirici wrote:
> I would have to surmise that the answer is Yes if the experiment in physical dimensions sufficiently small. Which answer makes me more comfortable with the quantum-theoretic view of reality.

Yup, that's what the results of the entire double-slit experiment are 
about.

	Yousuf Khan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#590823

On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 6:05:13 AM UTC-7, ken quirici wrote:
> I would have to surmise that the answer is Yes if the experiment in physical dimensions sufficiently small. Which answer makes me more comfortable with the quantum-theoretic view of reality.

No.  A single photon can be detected in only one place.  An interference pattern occupies a region of space, and can only be created with a large number of photons.  Note however that an interference pattern can be created by sending photons through a double slit one at a time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#590838

On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 1:38:40 PM UTC-4, pcard...@volcanomail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 6:05:13 AM UTC-7, ken quirici wrote:
> > I would have to surmise that the answer is Yes if the experiment in physical dimensions sufficiently small. Which answer makes me more comfortable with the quantum-theoretic view of reality.
> 
> No.  A single photon can be detected in only one place.  An interference pattern occupies a region of space, and can only be created with a large number of photons.  Note however that an interference pattern can be created by sending photons through a double slit one at a time.

Little steps. The photon is also a wave. Imagine we have a 2-dimensional graph of the photon, where the x-axis represents time. Then the photon as wave will appear like a sine wave. What is the y-axis measuring?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#590876

On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 12:23:13 PM UTC-7, ken quirici wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 1:38:40 PM UTC-4, pcard...@volcanomail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 6:05:13 AM UTC-7, ken quirici wrote:
> > > I would have to surmise that the answer is Yes if the experiment in physical dimensions sufficiently small. Which answer makes me more comfortable with the quantum-theoretic view of reality.
> > 
> > No.  A single photon can be detected in only one place.  An interference pattern occupies a region of space, and can only be created with a large number of photons.  Note however that an interference pattern can be created by sending photons through a double slit one at a time.
> 
> Little steps. The photon is also a wave. Imagine we have a 2-dimensional graph of the photon, where the x-axis represents time. Then the photon as wave will appear like a sine wave. What is the y-axis measuring?

A photon never "will appear like a sine wave".  The wave function of a quantum object does not represent oscillation of a physical quantity.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#590882

On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 8:05:33 PM UTC-4, pcard...@volcanomail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 12:23:13 PM UTC-7, ken quirici wrote:
> > On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 1:38:40 PM UTC-4, pcard...@volcanomail.com wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 6:05:13 AM UTC-7, ken quirici wrote:
> > > > I would have to surmise that the answer is Yes if the experiment in physical dimensions sufficiently small. Which answer makes me more comfortable with the quantum-theoretic view of reality.
> > > 
> > > No.  A single photon can be detected in only one place.  An interference pattern occupies a region of space, and can only be created with a large number of photons.  Note however that an interference pattern can be created by sending photons through a double slit one at a time.
> > 
> > Little steps. The photon is also a wave. Imagine we have a 2-dimensional graph of the photon, where the x-axis represents time. Then the photon as wave will appear like a sine wave. What is the y-axis measuring?
> 
> A photon never "will appear like a sine wave".  The wave function of a quantum object does not represent oscillation of a physical quantity.

Past two posts are nicely telling me what the waviness of a photon isn't, but nobody is telling me what it is. 

Is the waviness simply the quantum ambiguity in the position, which suggests a kind of probabilistic waviness? Although a wave has a regularity - periodicity - that I don't get from quantum probabilities.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#590909

On 7/26/2016 9:10 PM, ken quirici wrote:
> Past two posts are nicely telling me what the waviness of a photon isn't, but nobody is telling me what it is.
>
> Is the waviness simply the quantum ambiguity in the position, which suggests a kind of probabilistic waviness?
> Although a wave has a regularity - periodicity - that I don't get from quantum probabilities.

Actually you do. It is called a wavefunction for a reason. The quantum 
field itself has a periodicity, and that's expressed in a property 
called phase.

It's a mistake to blanket quantum mechanics as just being about 
fuzziness and probability. The eigenvalues of a quantum state are as 
rigid as anything in classical physics.

Read the Feynman books I recommended. Really.



-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#591012

בתאריך יום רביעי, 27 ביולי 2016 בשעה 15:29:59 UTC+3, מאת Odd Bodkin:
> On 7/26/2016 9:10 PM, ken quirici wrote:
> > Past two posts are nicely telling me what the waviness of a photon isn't, but nobody is telling me what it is.
> >
> > Is the waviness simply the quantum ambiguity in the position, which suggests a kind of probabilistic waviness?
> > Although a wave has a regularity - periodicity - that I don't get from quantum probabilities.
> 
> Actually you do. It is called a wavefunction for a reason. The quantum 
> field itself has a periodicity, and that's expressed in a property 
> called phase.
> 
> It's a mistake to blanket quantum mechanics as just being about 
> fuzziness and probability. The eigenvalues of a quantum state are as 
> rigid as anything in classical physics.
> 
> Read the Feynman books I recommended. Really.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
===========================
shameless criminal against mankind
see my new post from 28  July (today
with questions t  Moroney
and     pigs like you  
Y.Porat
=================================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#591034

On 7/28/2016 12:15 AM, poraty350@gmail.com wrote:
> בתאריך יום רביעי, 27 ביולי 2016 בשעה 15:29:59 UTC+3, מאת Odd Bodkin:
>> On 7/26/2016 9:10 PM, ken quirici wrote:
>>> Past two posts are nicely telling me what the waviness of a photon isn't, but nobody is telling me what it is.
>>>
>>> Is the waviness simply the quantum ambiguity in the position, which suggests a kind of probabilistic waviness?
>>> Although a wave has a regularity - periodicity - that I don't get from quantum probabilities.
>>
>> Actually you do. It is called a wavefunction for a reason. The quantum
>> field itself has a periodicity, and that's expressed in a property
>> called phase.
>>
>> It's a mistake to blanket quantum mechanics as just being about
>> fuzziness and probability. The eigenvalues of a quantum state are as
>> rigid as anything in classical physics.
>>
>> Read the Feynman books I recommended. Really.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> ===========================
> shameless criminal against mankind
> see my new post from 28  July (today
> with questions t  Moroney
> and     pigs like you
> Y.Porat
> =================================
>

The only reason I see this post is that your username got changed, and 
so I have to now do a click to add this new username to my killfile, so 
that I can go back to having my feed scrubbed clean of your posts.

I don't know if you've been trying to reply to my posts in the past. If 
you have, please understand that you are talking at a closed, locked, 
noise-proofed door.

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#591166

בתאריך יום חמישי, 28 ביולי 2016 בשעה 17:28:15 UTC+3, מאת Odd Bodkin:
> On 7/28/2016 12:15 AM, poraty350@gmail.com wrote:
> > בתאריך יום רביעי, 27 ביולי 2016 בשעה 15:29:59 UTC+3, מאת Odd Bodkin:
> >> On 7/26/2016 9:10 PM, ken quirici wrote:
> >>> Past two posts are nicely telling me what the waviness of a photon isn't, but nobody is telling me what it is.
> >>>
> >>> Is the waviness simply the quantum ambiguity in the position, which suggests a kind of probabilistic waviness?
> >>> Although a wave has a regularity - periodicity - that I don't get from quantum probabilities.
> >>
> >> Actually you do. It is called a wavefunction for a reason. The quantum
> >> field itself has a periodicity, and that's expressed in a property
> >> called phase.
> >>
> >> It's a mistake to blanket quantum mechanics as just being about
> >> fuzziness and probability. The eigenvalues of a quantum state are as
> >> rigid as anything in classical physics.
> >>
> >> Read the Feynman books I recommended. Really.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> > ===========================
> > shameless criminal against mankind
> > see my new post from 28  July (today
> > with questions t  Moroney
> > and     pigs like you
> > Y.Porat
> > =================================
> >
> 
> The only reason I see this post is that your username got changed, and 
> so I have to now do a click to add this new username to my killfile, so 
> that I can go back to having my feed scrubbed clean of your posts.
> 
> I don't know if you've been trying to reply to my posts in the past. If 
> you have, please understand that you are talking at a closed, locked, 
> noise-proofed door.
> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
=========================
 I have no intension to discuss with Paul Draper 
the anonymous crook
criminal
by intention is that
OTHERES 
WILL KNOW
WHO IS THAT*** ANONYMOUS** CRIMINAL AGAINST MANKIND !!
AND THIEF 

===========================
Y . PORAT
==================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#590931

On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 7:10:57 PM UTC-7, ken quirici wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 8:05:33 PM UTC-4, pcard...@volcanomail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 12:23:13 PM UTC-7, ken quirici wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 1:38:40 PM UTC-4, pcard...@volcanomail.com wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 6:05:13 AM UTC-7, ken quirici wrote:
> > > > > I would have to surmise that the answer is Yes if the experiment in physical dimensions sufficiently small. Which answer makes me more comfortable with the quantum-theoretic view of reality.
> > > > 
> > > > No.  A single photon can be detected in only one place.  An interference pattern occupies a region of space, and can only be created with a large number of photons.  Note however that an interference pattern can be created by sending photons through a double slit one at a time.
> > > 
> > > Little steps. The photon is also a wave. Imagine we have a 2-dimensional graph of the photon, where the x-axis represents time. Then the photon as wave will appear like a sine wave. What is the y-axis measuring?
> > 
> > A photon never "will appear like a sine wave".  The wave function of a quantum object does not represent oscillation of a physical quantity.
> 
> Past two posts are nicely telling me what the waviness of a photon isn't, but nobody is telling me what it is. 
> 
> Is the waviness simply the quantum ambiguity in the position, which suggests a kind of probabilistic waviness? Although a wave has a regularity - periodicity - that I don't get from quantum probabilities.

Reality is photons,electrons are coupled together so close together they can appear as one. The twin eperiment is proving this.These twins can move apart,and still be in contact.This was also proven,and helps prove my twin particle theory. This goes well with two other theories of mine.I love it when things start to fit well.It opens up a much brighter light at the end of a very long tunnel  TreBert

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#590850

pcardinale@volcanomail.com writes:

>On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 6:05:13 AM UTC-7, ken quirici wrote:
>> I would have to surmise that the answer is Yes if the experiment in
>>physical dimensions sufficiently small. Which answer makes me more
>>comfortable with the quantum-theoretic view of reality.

>No.  A single photon can be detected in only one place.  An interference
>pattern occupies a region of space, and can only be created with a large
>number of photons.  Note however that an interference pattern can be created
>by sending photons through a double slit one at a time.

A single photon will appear in only one place at the detector.  Where it
appears will be somewhat random.  I say "somewhat" in that it is likely
to appear where the interference pattern has a bright spot and is unlikely
to appear where the interference pattern has a dark spot.  The interference
pattern is actually the sum result of many, many photons exhibiting this
behavior.

It's like radioactive material.  You have no idea when a particular atom
will decay, but a macroscopic chunk of the stuff will have a very predictible
half-life.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#590894

On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 8:38:40 PM UTC+3, pcard...@volcanomail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 6:05:13 AM UTC-7, ken quirici wrote:
> > I would have to surmise that the answer is Yes if the experiment in physical dimensions sufficiently small. Which answer makes me more comfortable with the quantum-theoretic view of reality.
> 
> No.  A single photon can be detected in only one place. 
======================
you didn t understated what I claimed and proved 
so again
NO ONE WILL EVER BE ABLE
EVN TO DERECT A SINGLE PHOTON 
AND I EXCPLAINED ABOVE WHY !!!

if you have questions about it
just ask 

it is not a shame to ask
especially in physics science 
especially while the current 'understanding is
weird

ATB
Y.Porat
============================   





 An interference pattern occupies a region of space, and can only be created with a large number of photons.  Note however that an interference pattern can be created by sending photons through a double slit one at a time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#590914

"Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> writes:

>you didn t understated what I claimed and proved 
>so again
>NO ONE WILL EVER BE ABLE
>EVN TO DERECT A SINGLE PHOTON 
>AND I EXCPLAINED ABOVE WHY !!!

Single photons are detected all the time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#590921

בתאריך יום רביעי, 27 ביולי 2016 בשעה 16:30:34 UTC+3, מאת Michael Moroney:
> "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> >you didn t understated what I claimed and proved 
> >so again
> >NO ONE WILL EVER BE ABLE
> >EVN TO DERECT A SINGLE PHOTON 
> >AND I EXCPLAINED ABOVE WHY !!!
> 
> Single photons are detected all the time.
==================================
lire idiot 
I am proving to you that
no one will ever detect the real single photon
and a cock like you 
is blowing wind in th4air 
as good as to say
our earth is flat
h f  
 is one second defined
GOT IT BLOCKHEAD PARROT crock 
you are a criminal against mankind  
as well as the other gangster criminal
Paul Draper (P D
you cant cheat every body forever 
=======================================
Y.Porat
========================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#590927

Thanks Odd. My library had 'QED' and I got the audiobook for the lectures 'The Character of Physical Law' from Itunes. Also library had his lectures on Physics which I vaguely remember liking. He's meant to be good at explaining difficult concepts.

Regards

Ken

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web