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 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

#590932

On Wednesday, July 27, 2016 at 12:30:34 PM UTC-4, ken quirici wrote:
> 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

Just ordered V.1 of the lectures.

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

#590970

poraty350@gmail.com writes:

>> "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

Sorry, quantum mechanics proves you wrong.  Bubble chambers
where a gamma is produced and detected at the same time,
Einstein and the photoelectric effect, single atom gamma decays,
Geiger counters (when shielded from all but gammas),
lots of extremely low level light work etc.

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

#590997 — Young's two-pinhole moire'

what is it about electrons,
when absorbing or emmitting lightwaves,
requires a paticle of any sort,
other than the electrons & their protonic centers

> Einstein and the photoelectric effect, single atom gamma decays,
> Geiger counters (when shielded from all but gammas),
> lots of extremely low level light work etc.

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

#590963 — just say, no, thank you

is this thought to be  a single wavelength of the waveform

> Single photons are detected all the time.

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

#591011

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.
==============================
imbecile parrot criminal !!

a few questions to you and other idiot crock parrots :
--

PHOTON EMISSION IS AN ENERGY PHENOMENON ??
2
CAN AN ENERGY PHENOMENON BE DONE 
DURING 'NO TIME'
?
------
3 THE PHOTON ENERGY  OF A 'SINGLE PHOTON
IS DONE DURING
A 
ONE SECOND
B
2 SECONDS 
C
1/10 SECOND 
D 1/1000 SECOND
E
DURING 
/ONE BILLION OF A SECOND 

etc etc etc

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

  

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

#591365

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.
=====================
shameless liar !!!
Y.Porat
==================================

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

#591168

בתאריך יום שלישי, 26 ביולי 2016 בשעה 20:38:40 UTC+3, מאת pcard...@volcanomail.com:
> 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.
===========================
though  my long explanations 
you stil didn't get 
WHAT IS THE*** REAL SINGLE PHOTON*** !!
 I explained it step by step  !!

not only now in this very thread above and below 
but along many years !
only a blackhead will not  understand it
======================
Y.Porat
====================================
 
====

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

#591364

בתאריך יום שלישי, 26 ביולי 2016 בשעה 20:38:40 UTC+3, מאת pcard...@volcanomail.com:
> 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.

============================
Bravo !!
you started to get it !!!
now look for my old definition of the **real single*** photon energy:

E Min photon energy = h f times n 
while 

0 > n <<<<< 1.0000  !!!!!
--------
old copyright
Eng
Yehiel Porat
========================================== 
 

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

#590854

Dne 26/07/2016 v 15:05 ken quirici napsal(a):
> 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.
> 
As a photon can interfere with itself, it can.
But only if you do not register which slit it passes.

-- 
Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )
Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.

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

#590856

On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 4:31:53 PM UTC-4, Poutnik Fornntp wrote:
> Dne 26/07/2016 v 15:05 ken quirici napsal(a):
> > 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.
> > 
> As a photon can interfere with itself, it can.
> But only if you do not register which slit it passes.
> 
> -- 
> Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )
> Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.

Thanks all for the helpful comments.

But nobody dealt with my question: what does the y-axis represent in a graph of the photon wave? At least as far as I can tell. (ALAFAICT)

Maybe I'm taking the word 'wave' too literally, or using old uses of the word.

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

#590860

On 7/26/2016 4:01 PM, ken quirici wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 4:31:53 PM UTC-4, Poutnik Fornntp wrote:
>> Dne 26/07/2016 v 15:05 ken quirici napsal(a):
>>> 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.
>>>
>> As a photon can interfere with itself, it can.
>> But only if you do not register which slit it passes.
>>
>> --
>> Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )
>> Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
>
> Thanks all for the helpful comments.
>
> But nobody dealt with my question: what does the y-axis represent in a graph of the photon wave?
> At least as far as I can tell. (ALAFAICT)

There's a property of all quantum fields called "phase". Feynman 
describes this as being *something like* a turning hand on a clock face 
that just goes around. (See the books I mentioned.) Don't make too much 
of it other than that, except to note that every kind of oscillation or 
rotation has some kind of property that is phase. Phase is a property 
like momentum is a property, and it doesn't make sense to ask what 
momentum is made of or what is momentuming. Likewise, phase is a 
property of the object and it doesn't make sense to ask what the phase 
is made of or what is rotating.

So when you see any kind of waviness and you want to ask, what is waving 
back and forth, it's the phase of the field.

Note, this does NOT mean back and forth MOVEMENT to and fro. That's only 
true for certain kinds of waves where there is actual displacement 
through space, but is not a general feature.

>
> Maybe I'm taking the word 'wave' too literally, or using old uses of the word.
>


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

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

#590895

On Wednesday, July 27, 2016 at 12:38:46 AM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 7/26/2016 4:01 PM, ken quirici wrote:
> > On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 4:31:53 PM UTC-4, Poutnik Fornntp wrote:
> >> Dne 26/07/2016 v 15:05 ken quirici napsal(a):
> >>> 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.
> >>>
> >> As a photon can interfere with itself, it can.
> >> But only if you do not register which slit it passes.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )
> >> Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
> >
> > Thanks all for the helpful comments.
> >
> > But nobody dealt with my question: what does the y-axis represent in a graph of the photon wave?
> > At least as far as I can tell. (ALAFAICT)
> 
> There's a property of all quantum fields called "phase". Feynman 
> describes this as being *something like* a turning hand on a clock face 
> that just goes around. (See the books I mentioned.) Don't make too much 
> of it other than that, except to note that every kind of oscillation or 
> rotation has some kind of property that is phase. Phase is a property 
> like momentum is a property, and it doesn't make sense to ask what 
> momentum is made of or what is momentuming. Likewise, phase is a 
> property of the object and it doesn't make sense to ask what the phase 
> is made of or what is rotating.
> 
> So when you see any kind of waviness and you want to ask, what is waving 
> back and forth, it's the phase of the field.
> 
> Note, this does NOT mean back and forth MOVEMENT to and fro. That's only 
> true for certain kinds of waves where there is actual displacement 
> through space, but is not a general feature.
> 
> >
> > Maybe I'm taking the word 'wave' too literally, or using old uses of the word.
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
==============================
nasty criminal against mankind!!
after my proves and explanations 
no one will ever be able even to** detect** a 
real ''single single photon 
so go F only yourself with the BOOKS you 
recommend !!!
========================
Y.Porat
=============================

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

#590898

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-human-eye-photon-20160719-snap-story.html

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

#590902

בתאריך יום רביעי, 27 ביולי 2016 בשעה 09:31:43 UTC+3, מאת pnal...@gmail.com:
> http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-human-eye-photon-20160719-snap-story.html

===========================================
On Wednesday, July 27, 2016 at 9:31:43 AM UTC+3, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-human-eye-photon-20160719-snap-story.html

==============================
(:-)

you are funny !!
you want to learn physics
from Los  Angeles  news ???


so listen again :

Energy of photon is  E =h f
f is defined as number of Cycles PER SECOND 
AGAIN PER SECOND !!
EVEN IF YOU TAKE JUSTONE SECOND 
IT IS A HUGE TIME FOR PHOOTNENERGY TO BE EMITTED
you don't believe me ??
you don't need the Cern company to make s simple experiment 
)you don't need billions to pay them in order to make that 'historic '  experiment 

(btw
 I hope you understand that
during 2 seconds of photon  emission 
you get more photon energy than during one second 
right ??!!
so now
go to you light switch in your room
open it just for say 
1/10 second 
now comes the 1 billion '' question 
did you got during 1/10 seconds light emission 
photon energy ??
was that energy that you got
during 1/10 second 
more or less energy that during  one second ??
need I gave to goon with it 
2
more or less like our above experiment 
we can realize that
photon energy can be emitted during
even 1/1000 of a second  ??
so  my question is

considering the above experiments 
when did we got ''a single photon'
during experiment no 1
or during experiment 2
or may be
in   non of them !!!???

that above are experiments that should  get into
history of science !!??
(actually I published it
decades ago in this very n g 
you can get in in Google  achieves 
(the pig Paul Draper P D (Bodkin
was bitterly attacking  it
then and now!!
==
but it want help him and other blockhead pigs like him 
=====================================
you cant cheat every body forever !!!
=========================================
3
the real single photon energy is as follows :

E Photon min energy
is

 E photon min =   h f times  n 
while

0 > n <<<<< 1.0000

later u I equated that n
to be 
the** scalar part*** of plank  time !!
why ?
because the  plank time
is the smallest fraction of timer =we know 
and I got
smallest  photon MASS 
to be
about
exp - 90 KILOGRAM !!! THE ONLY*** KILOGRAN!!** 

NOT RELATIVISTIC
AND NOT SCHMELATIVISTIC MASS
JUST MASS !!!    
======
old  REVOLUTIONARY  copyright 
=====
ENG 
Yehiel Porat
==========================

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

#591060

On 7/26/2016 8:05 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.
>

An interference pattern is, by definition, an accumulation of many 
photons. You cannot get an interference pattern from one photon any more 
than you can get a landscape painting from one dollop of green paint.

However, what is true is that an interference pattern will be formed 
even if you fire photons one at a time through a double-slit apparatus, 
such that the fired photon lands before the next one is fired, and so 
you KNOW that no two fired photons are interfering with each other.

Interestingly, this I believe is true regardless of the physical 
dimensions of the apparatus, with the caveat that the angle between any 
maximum in the interference pattern and the adjacent minimum is 
determined by the ratio of the wavelength and the separation distance 
between the slits. (So it's possible to have that ratio such that the 
angle mentioned is more than 90 degrees, in which case you wouldn't see 
the pattern anyway.)


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

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

#591067 — sumably, pre-

congrats on e-nuking po.rat.  now,
you ne'er reply to me, and I think that
I know, why that may be, or not

actually, self-interference of wavey phenomena depends
upon the aperatures that are involved,
as is easy to see at a breakwater with at least no aperatures;
can also be described in terms of f-stops, presumably

> An interference pattern is, by definition, an accumulation of many 
> photons. You cannot get an interference pattern from one photon any more 
> than you can get a landscape painting from one dollop of green paint.
> 
> However, what is true is that an interference pattern will be formed 
> even if you fire photons one at a time through a double-slit apparatus, 
> such that the fired photon lands before the next one is fired, and so 
> you KNOW that no two fired photons are interfering with each other.
> 
> Interestingly, this I believe is true regardless of the physical 
> dimensions of the apparatus, with the caveat that the angle between any 
> maximum in the interference pattern and the adjacent minimum is 
> determined by the ratio of the wavelength and the separation distance 
> between the slits. (So it's possible to have that ratio such that the 
> angle mentioned is more than 90 degrees, in which case you wouldn't see 
> the pattern anyway.)
> 
> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#591093

On 07/28/2016 03:23 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 7/26/2016 8:05 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.
>>
>
> An interference pattern is, by definition, an accumulation of many
> photons. You cannot get an interference pattern from one photon any more
> than you can get a landscape painting from one dollop of green paint.
>
> However, what is true is that an interference pattern will be formed
> even if you fire photons one at a time through a double-slit apparatus,
> such that the fired photon lands before the next one is fired, and so
> you KNOW that no two fired photons are interfering with each other.
>
> Interestingly, this I believe is true regardless of the physical
> dimensions of the apparatus, with the caveat that the angle between any
> maximum in the interference pattern and the adjacent minimum is
> determined by the ratio of the wavelength and the separation distance
> between the slits. (So it's possible to have that ratio such that the
> angle mentioned is more than 90 degrees, in which case you wouldn't see
> the pattern anyway.)

So you believe that single photons diffract even if you can only see it 
when they are in herds? Diffraction is far more general than just the 
simplistic two slits that most physicists understand. Every point (which 
is a fantasy, natch) is a diffraction point. That has a name, I'm sure 
you know. As it turns out any pattern of modulation in space creates a 
diffraction pattern on single photons. If you consider angles greater 
than 90 it causes the functions to become imaginary (which should be 
right up your alley) and hence they represent near field energy. My 
diffraction theory explains all this but I was never allowed to finish 
it. I'm guessing I was "fired" for believing in ghosts like HVAC imagines.

I could explain it all to you boinker, but you wouldn't listen anyway.

Yes, it's me Benj! And why I'm suddenly B Gates is a long network 
nightmare. Why are digital people ALL such utter morons? Can you explain 
that to me?

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

#591106

even Fermat used "ray-tracing to work properties of light;
see _Light, a history:
the Fermat's complete correspondence on light_

> > Interestingly, this I believe is true regardless of the physical
> > dimensions of the apparatus, with the caveat that the angle between any
> > maximum in the interference pattern and the adjacent minimum is
> > determined by the ratio of the wavelength and the separation distance
> > between the slits. (So it's possible to have that ratio such that the
> > angle mentioned is more than 90 degrees, in which case you wouldn't see
> > the pattern anyway.)
> 
> So you believe that single photons diffract even if you can only see it 
> when they are in herds? Diffraction is far more general than just the 
> simplistic two slits that most physicists understand. Every point (which 
> is a fantasy, natch) is a diffraction point. That has a name, I'm sure 
> you know. As it turns out any pattern of modulation in space creates a 
> diffraction pattern on single photons. If you consider angles greater 
> than 90 it causes the functions to become imaginary (which should be 
> right up your alley) and hence they represent near field energy. My 
> diffraction theory explains all this but I was never allowed to finish 
> it. I'm guessing I was "fired" for believing in ghosts like HVAC imagines.
> 
> I could explain it all to you boinker, but you wouldn't listen anyway.
> 
> Yes, it's me Benj! And why I'm suddenly B Gates is a long network 
> nightmare. Why are digital people ALL such utter morons? Can you explain 
> that to me?

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

#591155

deaR Mister gaTes, note that
Liebniz's brachistochtone is just a single ray\normal
to the wavefront

> even Fermat used "ray-tracing to work properties of light;
> see _Light, a history:
> the Fermat's complete correspondence on light_

> > diffraction pattern on single photons. If you consider angles greater 
> > than 90 it causes the functions to become imaginary (which should be 
> > right up your alley) and hence they represent near field energy. My 
> > diffraction theory explains all this but I was never allowed to finish 

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

#591180

the wave is perfectly omnidirectional, and
all properties are those of waves.  one can use photon as only a quantum
of a certain energy per cycle e.g.

also, see Lanscoz' quaternionic treatment
of special relativity ... I did not get it,
when I first saw his bOOk, _Variational mechanicS, but
he was reputedly Einstein's secretary


> > see _Light, a history:
> > the Fermat's complete correspondence on light_
> 
> > > diffraction pattern on single photons. If you consider angles greater 
> > > than 90 it causes the functions to become imaginary (which should be 
> > > right up your alley) and hence they represent near field energy. My 
> > > diffraction theory explains all this but I was never allowed to finish

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

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web