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


Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #381583

Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ?

From Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Newsgroups sci.physics.relativity
Subject Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ?
Date 2016-04-14 12:45 +1000
Message-ID <dn8eiuF54ftU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <522445ba-87e4-4c65-bdc6-13e7d5980679@googlegroups.com> <negvlp$kq7$1@gioia.aioe.org> <a46507e3-eb5c-4c44-8a55-5189a8c7c681@googlegroups.com> <dn6nolFm5snU1@mid.individual.net> <d52ed321-9be8-40ab-bdbc-1a0754fae17a@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw


On 13/04/2016 10:02 PM, Y wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 13, 2016 at 9:10:16 PM UTC+10, Sylvia Else
> wrote:
>> On 12/04/2016 12:54 PM, Y wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, April 12, 2016 at 5:58:53 AM UTC+10, Odd Bodkin
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I want to recast this the way that scientists think of this
>>>> today. Let's take the case of electrons fired from an electron
>>>> gun at a double slit, where there is an electron-sensitive
>>>> screen behind that records where the electrons land. In what
>>>> follows, you can substitute the word "photon" for "electron"
>>>> everywhere, and there would be no change in the statements.
>>>> (Or, for that matter, you can substitute "proton" or "pion" or
>>>> "oxygen molecule" or "carbon atom" or "neutrino".)
>>>
>>> Sure.
>>>
>>>> The fact that there is an interference pattern that arises is
>>>> an indicator of the wavelike properties of the electron.
>>>
>>> Not of single electrons though - that wavelike behavior only
>>> 'emerges' and becomes more apparent with the more electrons
>>> hitting the screen.
>>>
>>
>> You can fire the electrons at the screen at the rate of one per
>> hour. Eventually, the interference pattern still shows.
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
> Yes, but maybe it's not a wave doing this, but rather waves just are
> a useful way to model what happens ? :) Maybe instead of wave
> interference, what we have is a distribution ?

You're trying to look beneath the model. Essentially, you're trying to 
construct a different model. If it's different, it must make different 
predictions about the results of measurements, or it will be 
mathematically equivalent, and not really be a different model at all.

So what you're trying to do is an exercise in futility unless you can 
show that the current model does not correctly predict the results of 
some measurements. That would require some actual measurements to be done.

Sylvia.

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Y <yanarchi@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-11 08:15 -0700
  Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Y <yanarchi@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-11 08:23 -0700
    Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 11:20 -0500
      Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Y <yanarchi@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-11 09:34 -0700
        Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 14:01 -0500
          Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Y <yanarchi@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-11 18:55 -0700
            Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 07:55 -0500
        Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 14:58 -0500
          Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Y <yanarchi@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-11 19:54 -0700
            Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 08:03 -0500
              Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Y <yanarchi@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-13 03:21 -0700
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 11:55 -0500
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Y <yanarchi@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-13 18:25 -0700
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-19 10:05 -0500
            Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-04-13 21:10 +1000
              Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Y <yanarchi@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-13 05:02 -0700
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-04-14 12:45 +1000
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Y <yanarchi@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-13 20:25 -0700
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Y <yanarchi@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-13 20:31 -0700
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-04-14 16:24 +1000
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 04:13 -0400
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-04-14 18:40 +1000
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Y <yanarchi@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-14 02:44 -0700
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Y <yanarchi@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-14 04:11 -0700
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 05:07 -0700
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-19 10:15 -0500
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 04:27 -0400
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-04-14 18:42 +1000
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-04-16 06:39 +0200
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-04-16 18:43 +1000
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Y <yanarchi@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-16 05:57 -0700
                Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-19 10:19 -0500
              Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Y <yanarchi@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-13 05:10 -0700
  Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Y <yanarchi@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-11 08:45 -0700
    Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-04-12 06:45 +0200
      Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-04-14 04:24 +0200
  Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 19:52 -0700
  Re: Waves - fundamental or emergent ? bruntlybunky <bruntlybunky@gmail.com> - 2016-04-19 15:12 -0700

csiph-web