Particle and light wave questions

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by jcc, Feb 14, 2015.

  1. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,549
    Valuable? Actually, I think it'd be good for me to be called a fool.

    I'm sure there's members that already would think that or whatever floats their boat.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    In medieval times the court jester or fool was able to challenge the views of the powerful through"silly" observations. Satire from others could prove fatal.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,549
    Now, that is insulting lol.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. theorist-constant12345 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,660
    Science does not lose, I have defended science, and stated why Jcc's idea fails, not just quoted back with present info, but asked him to give us a use of the idea and explained the ideas faults.
     
  8. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    Nobody answered the twin slit experiment question. This is where a single photon goes through a twin slit as a dual wave and a single particle, where there are two hydrogen atoms outside each slit. If we use energy conservation, one of two things can occur. If the particle acts as the leader, one hydrogen atom will feel full excitation. If the waves entering both slits are leading the energy, then both hydrogen atoms will feel 1/2 excitation, if such a quantum energy state exists. If this 1/2 energy level does not exist, nothing will appear to happen in terms of energy levels. That leads to other wave considerations.

    The point I was making is the wave theory approach is considered the cat's meow in terms of physics. If this experiment showed the particle to be leading, then the wave approach, although useful, is not pure science, but applied science. Applied science it does not have to be pure science to make money. Applied is about results, not purity. However, if we extrapolate the impure, then all that appears, is also tainted.

    This is an important experiment. This will tell us if the system is running but with a hidden defect that will cause the machine to break someday. I give it to anyone to run, if it has not been done yet.
     
  9. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    A photon is not a particle with a trailing wave like a boat. There is no supporting evidence for such a model.
     
  10. Layman Totally Internally Reflected Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,001
    I think a problem, with people saying that the two slit experiment violates conservation of energy because the particle goes through both slits, is that no one would actually be able to ever observe the particle going through both slits. Therefore, the energy of "two" particles would never have an influence on an observer. Then the two slit experiment wouldn't add more energy to the system of the observer. We would have to remember that what is actually going on in the two slit experiment is completely theoretical, and that a theoretical model to explain it actually never could be observed or counted as part of the system. There would never be an instance where an observer would see a particle go through both slits!
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2015
  11. Layman Totally Internally Reflected Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,001
    It is said that the act of observation gives it the properties of a particle instead of a wave. The act of observation changes it from having wavelike properties to particulate properties.
     
  12. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    The conservation of energy is not violated.
    Sure you can.
     
  13. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    That is essentially correct. But that does not really have anything to do with my statement that "a photon is not a particle with a trailing wave like a boat."
     
  14. jcc Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    412
    an atom has mass m, vibrates at f times per second, it will seed mfc^2/t energy/force out as gravity wave. the nature of the force wave is electrostatic force.

    light is not wave nor particle, light is gravitational pause produced by exited atoms.

    pretend the above is true, is in the mainstream text book. see if you understand and agree/
     
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Why don't you take your crap to the fringe section where it should be.
    Light is exactly what the mainstream text books tell us.
    What you spout here, makes no difference in the greater scheme of things.
     
    Kristoffer likes this.
  16. jcc Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    412
    so is light wave or particle? how electron emit photon? what's the mechanism?
     
  17. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543

    Light like most elementary basic particles exhibits the properties of both wave and particle.
    That as far as I know is pretty well near as proven as anything can be in physics.
    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mod5.html
     
  18. Kristoffer Giant Hyrax Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,364
    Can this travesty be either locked or moved? It has no place in the science section.
     
  19. jcc Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    412
    • Messages should not be cross-posted to several different threads.
    A particle, should be either at rest or at speed v without extra force apply on it.

    If it is moving, it moves along straight line. If it hits something, it may pass through/halfway, reflect or deflect. It will lose momentum/speed anyways.

    Does any light or EM wave ever slowdown?

    If light is particle, how a particle hits mirror and reflect back? What bounces it back? The electron? The nucleus? The empty space within silver atoms?
     
  20. Dr_Toad It's green! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,527
    Oh, boy.

    Where to begin with this one? The Cesspool comes to mind as a quick fix, but remedial instruction for the poster should be an option.
    Or, there are other options...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. jcc Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    412
    a particle, has mass, charge, position. either at rest or at move.

    water wave on the surface of water is not wave, but force moves horizontally on the water surface. gravity is involved. the true water wave is the sound wave within water.

    EM field is nothing but electrostatic force field. it is filled in space. all things/matter/charge are connected by this field.
     
  22. Dr_Toad It's green! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,527
    Wow, you smart. Go away.
     
  23. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    jcc:

    Yes. That's Newton's first law of motion.

    Not necessarily. It depends on the details of the collision.

    Yes. Light travels slower in mediums of higher refractive index. So, for example, light travels slower in water than in air.

    Reflection is best explained as a wave phenomenon. It requires interaction between the incoming light and the atoms in the surface of the mirror. The interesting part is that the process is coherent.

    Yes, you can distinguish between surface waves and volume waves (that move at an interface between two mediums, or in a single medium) if you wish. Both are waves, however. And yes, gravity is involved in surface water waves, whereas sound is a pressure wave.

    No. EM stands for ElectroMagnetic. You forgot the magnetic part. Also, Em fields often aren't static. Light is a good example.
     

Share This Page