explain why wave-particle duality is nonsense?

[Bishadi]

Lol,your English is appalling

thank you

and your reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired.

thank you

Now,do you have any real science for us?

if you cant read the thread, then i understand why you keep the rhetoric going.

Facts,

colors share mass is what governs the emissions (spectrometry proves that fact too)

proof,

look at the facts and have THE proof

experiments that you have carried out?

that your reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Describe your version of the double-slit experiment.

Describe the apparatus.
Describe the procedure.
Describe the predicted result.

In clear unambiguous English, please.

 

[Bishadi]

Describe your version of the double-slit experiment.

Describe the apparatus.

monochrom light double slit, detector/recieving plate

Describe the procedure.

send light thru slits to detector, record observations

Describe the predicted result.

with different mass of the detector, different patterns.

when trying to identify the single photon (per se) pattern for the wave-particle duality by changing the matter of the receiving plate, will show the matter is the reason for the particle release versus the wavelength acting like a particle.

the duality is busted!

In clear unambiguous English, please.


The double- slit experiment will provide the evidence of the error simply by being causal to comprehending the mass (molecular structure) of the receiving plate is relevant to the output of particle (per se) release.


Basic

 

[commandlinegamer]

the duality is busted!

My favorite dish is custard!

Hmm, got a rap going now, any proposals for the third line?

 

[Aitch]

My spectroscope's all rusted?

 

[dafydd]

Edited for rule 12.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky

 

[dafydd]

thank you




thank you


if you cant read the thread, then i understand why you keep the rhetoric going.

colors share mass is what governs the emissions (spectrometry proves that fact too)

look at the facts and have THE proof

that your reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired.

I have read the thread,and you have not presented any science yet.A little humility would go a long way with you.Have you ever considered that you might actually be wrong about something?

 

[Skwinty]

I think Bishadi may be into Quantum Philosophy.


"For me, the main purpose of doing experiments is to show people how strange quantum physics is," says Anton Zeilinger of the University of Innsbruck, who is both a theorist and experimentalist ."Most physicists are very naive; most still believe in real waves or particles."


http://www.fortunecity.com/emachines/e11/86/qphil.html

No comments on the above???

 

[Jack by the hedge]

with different mass of the detector, different patterns.

How obvious a difference should the experimenter expect to see?

If they switch the detector between, say a polystyrene foam plate and a lead plate, would you expect them to see a clearly visible change of colour? Which plate should be blue-shifted and which red-shifted? How big a change should they expect to see in the interference pattern? Which should be wider and which narrower?

 

[Bishadi]

I have work to do; which color coach/jeep combination should i get?

How obvious a difference should the experimenter expect to see?

That is what is nice about the experiment; any difference shares fact to the postulate.

If they switch the detector between, say a polystyrene foam plate and a lead plate, would you expect them to see a clearly visible change of colour?

your eyes to pop out!

but i doubt an apology is even possible.

Which plate should be blue-shifted and which red-shifted?

first to last, then last to first; be certain of an outcome!

How big a change should they expect to see in the interference pattern?

Global!

Affecting all branches of science and understanding.

Which should be wider and which narrower?

After it sets in the wide scope is what the new comprehension enables, The narrow band is to be extinct because they could not evolve to comprehend what it is like 'out of the cave'.

I tink da lite b 2 brite!

 

[ingoa]

I sense a Turing test fail.

Using a language, which looks like English, but isn't.
Lots of posts without a recognisable content.
Sounds like my Pentium III.

Shrug... I am really lost.

 

[Dinwar]

That is what is nice about the experiment; any difference shares fact to the postulate.

No. Minor deviations are common in all experiments--it's the reason we can discuss signal to noise ratios and the like.

If you want to propose a different paradigme you need to predict specific deviations from the present one (mathematically is best, but I think most of us have stopped looking for math in your posts), and not simply say "Anything that's not what you predict proves my point" (leaving out, conveniently, what is predicted by the current paradigm).

 

[Mikemcc]

So how does light from a monochromatic source change frequency (colour) without Raman filtering, which requires absorbtion and re-emission? Raman filters are rather conspicuously absent from your experiment description

 

[Weak Kitten]

So how does light from a monochromatic source change frequency (colour) without Raman filtering, which requires absorbtion and re-emission? Raman filters are rather conspicuously absent from your experiment description

Sorry, it's kitten tangent time. What is a Raman Filter? I keep envisioning something involving tasty fried noodles in broth and that's just not right.

 

[Mikemcc]

Sorry, it's kitten tangent time. What is a Raman Filter? I keep envisioning something involving tasty fried noodles in broth and that's just not right.

The Raman effect is seen when photons cause an aspect of a molecule to change (usually vibrational energy), then the absorbed energy is released by emitting another photon.

For non-Raman active materials the emitted photon has the same frequency. But, depending on the material the energy of the emitted photon may be different so it changes frequency.

http://www.princetoninstruments.com/spectroscopy/raman.aspx

Most of Bishadi's examples unfortunately either don't involve absorbtion (at the slits in the two-slit diffusion experiment - ignoring edge effects at the edges of the slits) or don't involve photon emission (at the detector). Bishadi seems to be trying to convince us that there is a way to combine Raman scattering and the photo-electric effect, missing the point that they are different processes, one has has a photon as an output and the other has an electron.

 

[Bishadi]

So how does light from a monochromatic source change frequency (colour) without Raman filtering, which requires absorbtion and re-emission? Raman filters are rather conspicuously absent from your experiment description

a err dah..... mass (matter) does the raman, naturally (how do you think you see colors?)



funny post

almost like the post above yours, he is putting noise as an issue of the DSE with a monochrom light............

 

[Bishadi]

The Raman effect is seen when photons cause an aspect of a molecule to change (usually vibrational energy), then the absorbed energy is released by emitting another photon.

atta boy

and when you send a per se photon thru a double slit to the detector, that process is what you are observing to even see the pattern on the detector.

For non-Raman active materials the emitted photon has the same frequency. But, depending on the material the energy of the emitted photon may be different so it changes frequency.

just like 'colors'...............

Most of Bishadi's examples unfortunately either don't involve absorbtion (at the slits in the two-slit diffusion experiment - ignoring edge effects at the edges of the slits) or don't involve photon emission (at the detector). Bishadi seems to be trying to convince us that there is a way to combine Raman scattering and the photo-electric effect, missing the point that they are different processes, one has has a photon as an output and the other has an electron.

i know that and i am glad you are reading

the electron aspect is to share the particle-duality portion as being from the detector. ie... what you see is from what the detector releases

both examples you pointing at share the receiving mass is 'relevant'


ie... that is what the experiment is PROVING!

 

[aleCcowaN]

does the raman and walk the planck, m*f*

(that's how a member of the neighbouhood's quantic gang would talk)

 

[Dinwar]

almost like the post above yours, he is putting noise as an issue of the DSE with a monochrom light............

If you're referring to me, I was simply providing one reason why we keep asking you for specific predictions--because nearly all experiments encounter variations caused by events other than that which is being tested for. Scientists call those "noise". Without specific predictions you fall into the realm of pseudoscience (the only reason ghost hunters exist is because they ignore the difference between signal and noise). "Noise" here does NOT mean "stuff you hear"; it's being used in its statistical meaning.

 

[Mikemcc]

atta boy

and when you send a per se photon thru a double slit to the detector, that process is what you are observing to even see the pattern on the detector.


just like 'colors'...............




i know that and i am glad you are reading

the electron aspect is to share the particle-duality portion as being from the detector. ie... what you see is from what the detector releases

both examples you pointing at share the receiving mass is 'relevant'


ie... that is what the experiment is PROVING!

No it's NOT. Detectors are chosen to match the experimenters purpose (i.e. CMT for a thermal imager, photo-multipliers for low-light intensities, phosphor screens to produce visual images from non-visible phenomenon). There is NO relationship to 'mass'.

For instance if the two-slit diffration experiment is carried out with diffraction image projected onto a sheet of paper the observer will see that pattern. If the paper is substituted with a white painted block of lead in exactly the same position the observer will still see EXACTLY the same diffraction pattern. The detector (the observers eyes) have not changed. The source and slits have not changed. The only thing changed is the surface the image is projected onto, and there is NO CHANGE in that image.