• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged I killed Duality and Uncertainty for a Theory of Everything

Robin said:
Can you answer my question or can't you?

If not, can you describe one of the ways that a mainstream physicist would describe that pattern mathematically?
Click to expand...
I am not even saying that I am right or wrong here, I am happy to be corrected on this.
 
pittsburghjoe said:
It's a clump, you aren't going to get anything useful from it.
Click to expand...
So you are saying this "clump" could literally be any shape?

Again, I am happy to be corrected on this. I am not setting myself up as any expert.
 
Robin said:
So you are saying this "clump" could literally be any shape?

Again, I am happy to be corrected on this. I am not setting myself up as any expert.
Click to expand...

Even bullets fired randomly through two slits would build up a pattern that could be described mathematically.
 
If they're flying like bullets passing through two separate slits from a single source then there will definitely be a pattern -
two narrow lines, the width of which are determined by the size of the source, the width of the slits, and the distance from the source to the slits and from the slits to the screen.

This is absolutely mathematically determinable.
 
However I have refreshed my memory from Richard Feynman's "Quantum Mechanics and Path Integrals".

In chapter 1 "The Fundamental Mechanics of Quantum Mechanics".

Take a point on the back panel and ask - what is the probability that the electron will hit here?

He describes the two components, phi1 - the amplitude for it to reach that point via slit 1 and phi2, the amplitude for it to reach that point via slit 2.

When there is nothing to detect which slit the electron passes through the probability that it will reach that point is | ph1+phi2 |^2. As it is the amplitudes that are summed there will be cancelling out and therefore the interference pattern.

When there is something to detect which slit the electron passes through the probability that it will reach that point is | ph1 |^2 + | phi2 |^2. So the sums are of the probabilities derived from each amplitude.

So the pattern will be a bimodal curve ( two "clumps" as you call it), but it has a very definite mathematical shape which depends on the wave nature of the electron.

The same will happen if there are two possible sources of particles even if there is no 'detector' in between. If it would not have been possible to tell which source the particle came from you get the probability by | ph1+phi2 |^2. But if it would have been possible to tell which source emitted the particle then you get the probability by | ph1 |^2 + | phi2 |^2 and two clumps ( with a very definite mathematically predictable shape) .
 
Last edited:
pittsburghjoe said:
you are not getting observed landing positions from wave nature. They are random, you don't get to say that.
Click to expand...
They are random when there is an interference pattern too.

The difference is the way the probabilities are summed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom