Deeper than primes

[The Man]

Being wavicle does not mean that its local aspect (particle) = its non-local aspect (wave).

Being wavicle means that locality and non-locality complement each other into a one complex phenomenon, which is not totally local and not totally non-local.

Total Non-locality is the qualitative aspect that has no successor of this complementation and total Locality is the qualitative aspect that has no predecessor of this complementation, such that these qualities are identified opposite aspects of that is beyond any identification at its self-state (the un-identified, which is not local and not non-local or any other attempt to identify it).

Non-locality/Locality qualitative complementation, is the foundation of the Quantitative aspect of the researched Complexity, and Standard reasoning deals only with the identified quantitative result of this complementation, which misses the understanding of Uncertainty, Redundancy and incomplete aspects of real Complexity.

Neither your assertion of “Being wavicle” nor the rest of your word salad changes the fact that you obviously still do not…

…understand that both (single slit and double slit patterns) are “wave” patterns (probability distributions) as well as “particle” patterns (the pattern made by the interaction of the particles, photons in the cited example, with the screen)...

By the way…

Have you found that “additional experiment” you referred to yet?

Another example of how The Man's reasoning is closed under the dichotomy of disjoint and context-dependent view of knowledge, where in this example Philosophy and Mathematics are disjoint.

Another example of how Doron simply likes to label people with some “reasoning” of entirely his own fantasy.

The Man's isolated context-dependent areas of knowledge is a fantasy, because by his method he simply can't know that there are many isolated context-dependent areas, without using also a non-local view of them.

Doron the fantasies remain entirely yours, including that one.

It is not useful to any one which ignores the use of non-local view of the obsereved.

No Doron your notions just aren’t useful period, except of course just to you for feeding your fantasies.

 

[The Man]

http://www.quantumango.info/double-slit-experiment-the-strangeness-of-quantum-mechanics/

It is well known that measurement has a significant influence on the measured at the quantum level.

It is also well known that photons have more than one level of energy, for example: "red" photon has less energy than "blue" photon.

By using photons with different levels of energy in order to discover, for example, from which silt some electron passed the barrier, we are changing the pattern on the screen detector, where "blue" photons measurement's results are more similar to single-silt pattern (particle), and "red" photons measurement's results are more similar to double-silt pattern (wave).

We can gradually change the pattern on the screen detector between wave pattern and particle pattern, by using photons with different energies between low "red" and high "blue".

Organic Number's DS (Distinct States) are used here as a model that describes the changes of the patterns on the screen detector, according to the energy of the photons that are used to measure the passed electrons.

The link you posted makes no reference to any “additional experiment” such as you referred to before and attempt to describe above. Again cite the specific experiment and we can discuss it, otherwise it remains just a figment of your imagination.


So again…

Have you found that “additional experiment” you referred to yet?

 

[epix]

I'm glad to learn that I'm not the only person who regards Doron's contribution to the fields of hypergeometric summation and q-Series, as an exceptional insight.
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/biography/Zeilberger.html

 

[doronshadmi]

Case in point.

Case in line and points.

 

[doronshadmi]

...fantasies.

For the "s" at the end of the word above, you can't avoid Non-locality.

 

[Marcus]

I see that this thread is still alive, but in the religion and philosophy section, where it should be.

 

[doronshadmi]

Have you found that “additional experiment” you referred to yet?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312965,00.html

Now all you have to do is to use the levels of energy between the two examined cases and get the intermediate patterns.

 

[doronshadmi]

I see that this thread is still alive, but in the religion and philosophy section, where it should be.

More context-dependent view.

 

[jsfisher]

Case in line and points.

I see what you did there. Now, are you clever enough to finally fix your mistakes in your 3X3 presentation?

 

[epix]

I see that this thread is still alive, but in the religion and philosophy section, where it should be.

I shall take the liberty of rephrasing you comment to the effect of being fully understood: this thread became non-local to other board sections.

 

[doronshadmi]

I see what you did there.

No, you don't.

For example, by your http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5958959&postcount=9925 reply to http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5958767&postcount=9924 it is clearly seen that all you get from a given k x k tree is the method that calculates the Distinct States of it (which is limited to the "How many?" question) that clearly demonstrates your misunderstanding of k x k complexity.

Both The Man and you can't comprehend http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5949657&postcount=9889 because of your serial-only reasoning.

Now, are you clever enough to finally fix your mistakes in your 3X3 presentation?

Since you are the clever person in this case, then please show us the mistakes.

Again, if you want to shoot, shoot, don't talk.

 

[jsfisher]

Since you are the clever person in this case, then please show us the mistakes.

They are your mistakes, not mine, and they are your mistakes in presenting your grand notions, not mine. They are your blunders to correct. Your inability to do so speaks volumes.

 

[The Man]

For the "s" at the end of the word above, you can't avoid Non-locality.

Even by just considering "the "s" at the end of the word above" you can't avoid your fantasies.

 

[The Man]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312965,00.html

I am familiar with the experiment cited in that article and here is the abstract of that experiment.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/318/5852/949

You will note “Interference fringes observed in the angular distribution of a single electron are lost through its Coulomb interaction with a second electron, though the correlated momenta of the entangled electron pair continue to exhibit quantum interference.”

It’s a trade off Doron (as I have been trying to explain to you), The more localized the position the less localized the momentum and the more localized the momentum the less localized the position. That is the uncertainty principle and it has nothing to do with your nonsensical notions.

Now all you have to do is to use the levels of energy between the two examined cases and get the intermediate patterns.

“Now all you have to do”? So the experiment you are referring to (with your “intermediate patterns” based on your “levels of energy”) is just a figment of your imagination.

Oh wait you have claimed…

Organic Number's DS (Distinct States) are used here as a model that describes the changes of the patterns on the screen detector, according to the energy of the photons that are used to measure the passed electrons.

So show that “model that describes the changes of the patterns on the screen detector, according to the energy of the photons that are used to measure the passed electrons”. As well as the corresponding experimental data that supports your “model”.


ETA: Some more details on the experiment cited.


http://www.atom.uni-frankfurt.de/web/research/atomic/photonmolecule/H2_double/3_double_slit/#science

 

[The Man]

Both The Man and you can't comprehend http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5949657&postcount=9889 because of your serial-only reasoning.

Oh no, not the dreaded “serial-only reasoning” Doron label again. What’s the matter, you’ve gotten tired of typing “disjoint and context-dependent” or just “disjoint reasoning” already?

 

[doronshadmi]

The more localized the position the less localized the momentum and the more localized the momentum the less localized the position.

As I claim, your reasoning is limited to Local-only view of the observed.

But the fact is that momentum is the signature of Non-locality and Position is the signature of Locality, and both (Non-locality and Locality) are the qualitative foundations of the observed.

(as I have been trying to explain to you)

In other words, you have no case to explain here.

That is the uncertainty principle and it has nothing to do with your nonsensical notions.

The Uncertainty Principle of Heisenberg is derived from the complementation of the two qualities, known as Non-Locality and Locality, which are mutually independent w.r.t each other under a one phenomenon called wavicle.

The Uncertainty Principle of Heisenberg is not the Uncertainty of ids under Superposition, which is something that your linear_serial view of the observed simply can't comprehend.

The Uncertainty of ids under Superposition is exactly the wave pattern (the signature of Non-locality) and the Certainty of ids under no Superposition is exactly the particle pattern (the signature of Non-locality).

The different energy levels are the serial transition from Non-locality (wave pattern and superposition) to Locality (particle pattern and non-superposition) and vice versa, such that Non-locality and Locality complement each other and therefore do not derived from each other.

Again, it is impossible to measure Total Non-locality or Total Locality because they are mutually independent and a wavicle is a consistent result of this mutual independency, which is the essence of any consistent axiomatic framework.

 

[doronshadmi]

Oh no, not the dreaded “serial-only reasoning” Doron label again.

Tell it to yourself, you are the one that is closed under this limitation.

 

[jsfisher]

But the fact is that momentum is the signature of Non-locality and Position is the signature of Locality, and both (Non-locality and Locality) are the qualitative foundations of the observed.

You've disproven Heisenberg! That's great. Do let the people in Sweden know.

 

[doronshadmi]

They are your mistakes, not mine, and they are your mistakes in presenting your grand notions, not mine. They are your blunders to correct. Your inability to do so speaks volumes.

In other words, you have no case here, and this is my last reply to you about your "By the way, how are those corrections coming, or have you given up?" bla bla ...

 

[doronshadmi]

You've disproven Heisenberg! That's great. Do let the people in Sweden know.

No, I support Heisenberg because Non-locality and Locality complement each other.

Please read all of http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6027041&postcount=10116 .