Fleshing Out Wave-Particle Duality in the ISU

quantum_wave

quantum_wave

Contemplating the "as yet" unknown
Valued Senior Member
As a result of Cptbork's and my mutually developed thread, Bell's Theorem and Non-locality, the discussion seemingly reached an end point (I know, thank goodness, lol).

This thread is an off-shoot from that thread, as well as a new thread related to the evolution of the Infinite Spongy Universe model of Cosmology (ISU). You'll find this to be a long wordy post that most members shouldn't bother to read unless you have kept abreast of the development of the ISU cosmology over the years here at Sciforums, and are familiar with the current treatment of wave-particle duality that is unique to the model. For those of you who are up to speed, this post contains new material that I hope to incorporate into the model, but first would like to give those in the community that have followed along, a chance to weigh in, on topic. (That is said sincerely, but without knowing for sure that any member or lurker falls in the category of "up to speed").


Fleshing Out Wave-Particle Duality in the ISU

One notion that I am contemplating in regard to evolving the ISU model is that, given the model's (often posted) description of the nature of wave-particle duality, it works out that a particle's location and its momentum have a degree of overlap. That statement requires some further explanation because generally, location and momentum are considered separate measurable aspects of a given particle, not overlapping concepts. It is the general scientific consensus that we cannot measure precisely both the location and momentum of a given particle, and this addition supports that consensus, but expands it to say that neither location nor momentum can be precisely measured, given the ISU description of wave-particle duality.

To explain: Within the particle space, one portion of the constituent wave energy of the particle will have location, i.e. standing still or at rest relative to the particle boundary, by participating in momentary high density spots that have brief but finite durations. The other portion of the internal wave energy will be engaged in spherical expansion relative to the particle boundary, i.e. not standing still within the particle. The "waves in motion" portion are setting up for new high density wave intersection encounters, i.e. for participating in a batch of new high density spots that will subsequently form. And further, a portion of those new spots will form just outside of the currently existing particle boundary as they encounter inflowing wave energy. Those new "outside" spots, when netted out directionally, relative to the particle boundary, will represent motion of the particle; motion will be in the direction of the highest net energy density of new outside spots.

That is the new content. Given that description of the internal/external wave action associated with the presence of a particle, there is no clear complete location when location is defined as the internal location of the high density spots existent at a given instant, because those spots represent only a portion of the particles total energy. Correspondingly, there is no clear momentum when momentum is defined as the motion of the entire complex standing wave pattern, because there is always a portion of the energy associated with the standing wave pattern that is not moving with the pattern, i.e. the momentary high density spots. The particle both rests and moves depending on which portion of the internal wave energy composition you refer to.

Background on the nature of wave-particle duality from previous posts and threads:

Note that this is a description of quantum action at the micro level, but you must also be up to speed on the macro level which describes the decay of the dense state wave energy of a Big Crunch into the generally stable known particles in the mature big bang arena. Those are the particles that participate at the micro level, and that are involved in this discussion of particle location and momentum.

Rather than try to link to the pertinent previous threads and posts, some background here might be informative. At the micro level, wave-particles in the ISU have an internal composition that consists of the on-going wave action of a huge number of tiny foundational waves, within the particle space. Particles are composed of standing wave patterns, and the standing waves have two components, directionally inflowing wave energy (from surrounding particles and objects) and spherically out flowing wave energy (that leaves the particle space and becomes the inflowing wave energy component of surrounding particles and objects).

The internal wave action occurs as a result of the high number of tiny inflowing and out flowing waves that make up the complex standing wave pattern. The wave components are continually intersecting within the particle, and when they intersect, they form hypothetical high density spots because the wave energy of each individual wave is momentarily added together when the waves intersect. I say momentarily, because there is a time delay between the point of intersection and the point in time when the high density spot produces its subsequent spherically out flowing counterpart. That time delay is caused by a period of compression of the wave energy of each parent wave as they intersect, and each such intersection results in a new spherical wave out of the high density spot.
 
Particle Motion in the ISU is Continuous

Neither location nor momentum can be precisely measured, given the ISU description of wave-particle duality, i.e. there is a degree of overlap between the measurements of location and momentum as described in the opening post. The model "predicts" (in the sense that a layman might use the term) that particle motion is continuous, as opposed to discrete; motion appears in the tiniest iteration.

For convenience, the concept of location based on the position of the high density spot portion of energy within a particle space, at a given instant, can be used, and also as a similar convenience in calculations and experimental results, measurement of motion as the change in position from location to location, given an iteration interval, can be used. However, if you expect nature to allow precise measurement of location or momentum, then the invariant laws of nature, according to the ISU, disappoint.

Locality is always a little imprecise because if you attempt to assign a discrete amount of energy to a particle, you must accept that energy to have a "fuzzy" location, and if you attempt to assign a precise location to a particle, you must accept that the energy in that particle space is imprecise.

In the ISU, you give up precision in those respects, but you gain a layman level model that hypothesizes continuous particle motion with hypothetical wave action mechanics.

(25)
 
The work around for seeing both position and momentum at the same time is picture in picture. One picture looks for position and does not mind if it cannot measure momentum. The other is only trying to measure momentum and does not care about position. Being picture in picture, we the audience, get to see both at the same time, especially if we overlay the two measurements via photoshop layers.

The traditional limitation is about a single picture, and not picture in picture. This solution is based on new technology not around during the original observations. They did not have this to work with.
 
So you know now that my model describes continuous particle motion in a wave-particle context, and supports that position with some reasonable speculations and hypotheses about the mechanics of wave energy, standing wave particles, and particle motion. Everything physical, in my model, is composed of nothing but wave energy traversing the medium of space.

My view is unique in terms of the mechanics of wave-particle duality, and here is one link that supports the opposite view, i.e. discontinuous motion of particles. Note that he starts rigth out with the BIG IF; "if there exists only one kind of physical reality---particles, then the realistic motion of particles described by qunatum mechanics should be discontinuous motion."

My point --- the only kind of physical reality isn't likely to be particles in the sense that Rui Qi suggests. Particles are quickly becoming recognized as having wave-particle duality, and that is how thay are represented in my model, i.e. composed of noting but intersecting wave energy components of standing wave patterns.

Here is the Rui Qi link to show his reasoning:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0209022.pdf

Quantum mechanics and discontinuous motion of particles
Rui Qi
Institute of Electronics, Chinese Academy of Sciences
17 Zhongguancun Rd., Beijing, China E-mail: rg@mail.ie.ac.cn

"We discuss a new realistic interpretation of quantum mechanics based on discontinuous motion of particles. The historical and logical basis of discontinuous motion of particles is given. It proves that if there exists only one kind of physical reality---particles, then the realistic motion of particles described by quantum mechanics should be discontinuous motion. We further denote that protective measurement may provide a direct method to confirm the existence of discontinuous motion of particles."

(72)
 
quantum_wave, if I may ask, why do you have that weird obsession with adding the thread view count after your posts?

It'd be like me proudly announcing that someone somewhere watched one of my dumb YouTube gameplay videos to random people I meet on the street.
 
Often days go by without anyone viewing the thread. Generally, I like to wait until it has been view twenty times, and by posting the thread views in the content posts, I know that any regular viewers have seen it.
 
The "Moment of Momentum"

Now that particles are described as having hypothetical "outside" high density spots consisting of wave intersections occurring as the inflowing and out flowing wave energy components converge at and around the particle boundary, there is some suggestion of what I might call, the "moment of momentum"of the particle. The moment of momentum would be a vector (used in the layman sense). The net presence of those "outside" high density spots occurs at a specific location at the particle boundary or "surface", and the particle motion is in the direction of that net surface location in this mechanistic description.

The "moment of momentum" on the particle surface represents the direction that the particle moves in, in response to the net directional inflowing wave energy component of the standing wave pattern.

(134)
 
As if we weren't already delving into "advanced alternative" territory, this post will move us soundly in that direction. It is a spin-off from Newton's "spinning bucket of water on a rope" thought experiment, and as well, about his follow-on thought experiment about a universe consisting of two tethered rocks, lol.

Get the background from this link, http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Newton_bucket.html, and then see if you don't agree that these thoughts, that are consistent with the ISU Cosmology, don't offer a look at those thought experiments from another perspective.

As Berkeley pointed out, Einstein was ignoring the mass of the stars when proposing to go into deep space, far from the gravitational effect of the Earth, sun and stars; George Berkeley referred to the bucket as rotating relative to the fixed stars, explaining why the surface became concave instead of remaining flat. I'm sure most of us would at least partially agree with that explanation.

However, I have often thought of the bucket of water existing alone in an otherwise empty universe, just like the bucket of water, or tethered rocks that Einstein contemplated. My model would predict, in the layman usage of the word, an unusual consequence. Given the nature of particles, which exist as standing waves, with inflowing and out flowing wave energy components, particles are continually in the process of dissolving spherically out into surrounding space, and at the same time being refreshed by the wave energy of other surrounding particles and objects; particles experience quantum action which is striking a balance between the energy in and the energy out. The particle presence consists of the energy contained in the particle space, but the particle is always "dumping" its contained energy out into space, and correspondingly always having its energy replaced as energy is "poured" into the space from the outpouring that is going on around it in all directions.

An otherwise empty universe would not be supplying the inflowing wave energy component to sustain the presence of the particles of water and the bucket, (or the tethered rocks). Several conclusions can be drawn about such a universe where there was no inflowing energy, and also about the outflowing wave energy component if there was no outside source of inflowing wave energy. Would the circumstances cause the water and bucket to disappear into an expanding ball of wave energy endlessly declining in density, and endlessly traversing an otherwise empty space. Or on the other hand, would the forces balance out and prevent the outflowing component from happening, i.e. meaning that the energy could not escape the vicinity of the bucket.

One friend from years past here would have said that the water and the bucket would increase in volume but they would continue to look like the same water and bucket, without any way to realize that they were continually expanding in size :shrug:.

The discussion of those circumstances in my model becomes a discussion about the competing forces of energy density equalization vs. gravity, and about the changing energy density of the volume of space occupied by the mass present.

(171)
 
The wave-particle duality does not imply an equivalency of particles and waves, because waves can occupy the same space but particles cannot.

As a thought experiment, say we had a wave tank, with two wave generators, one at each end. These generate waves that are 180 degree out of phase. In the center of the tank the waves will cancel as the troughs of the waves from the left superimpose on the crests of waves from the right, and vice versa.

Although energy and work is constantly added, there is silence in the center of the tank due to the waves canceling. The energy appears hidden. We can place a partition in the silence of the center of the tank, to make the energy reappear. The partition is analogous to the particle nature, in that particles can't occupy the same space. This allows the hidden energy to reappear.

Theoretically, a wave universe, but with all waves canceling, would have endless energy but would appear like a void, if there were no particles in the universe. The appearance of particles will partition the stillness, so energy appears out of the stillness; particle/waves appear as energy.

In terms of energy/photons, energy moves at the speed of light, which is the same in all references. Yet wavelength and frequency can change with reference. These are two distinct things. I would guess since the particle is the partition, and the partition allows energy to appear, the particle aspect is connected to inertial, while wave aspect is at C. Changes in the height and width of the partition, due to GR and SR, allowing the energy to appear or disappear, to and from C, into and out of inertial space-time.
 
wellwisher said:
The wave-particle duality does not imply an equivalency of particles and waves, because waves can occupy the same space but particles cannot.

As a thought experiment, say we had a wave tank, with two wave generators, one at each end. These generate waves that are 180 degree out of phase. In the center of the tank the waves will cancel as the troughs of the waves from the left superimpose on the crests of waves from the right, and vice versa.

Although energy and work is constantly added, there is silence in the center of the tank due to the waves canceling. The energy appears hidden. We can place a partition in the silence of the center of the tank, to make the energy reappear. The partition is analogous to the particle nature, in that particles can't occupy the same space. This allows the hidden energy to reappear.

Theoretically, a wave universe, but with all waves canceling, would have endless energy but would appear like a void, if there were no particles in the universe. The appearance of particles will partition the stillness, so energy appears out of the stillness; particle/waves appear as energy.

In terms of energy/photons, energy moves at the speed of light, which is the same in all references. Yet wavelength and frequency can change with reference. These are two distinct things. I would guess since the particle is the partition, and the partition allows energy to appear, the particle aspect is connected to inertial, while wave aspect is at C. Changes in the height and width of the partition, due to GR and SR, allowing the energy to appear or disappear, to and from C, into and out of inertial space-time.
Click to expand...
Note that the waves that carry energy as they traverse the medium of space in my model are spherical waves, not surface waves.

My posts are model specific, and relate to the Infinite Spongy Universe model of the universe, a layman level model, presented for discussion. Your post overlooks the hypotheses and speculations of my layman model, and doesn't quote any specific content from this thread.

Your post is not correct in regard to the ISU model. In the ISU, all that exists is wave energy, three dimensional waves, traversing the medium of space.

In the ISU, particles are complex patterns of standing waves, and standing waves have inflowing and out flowing wave energy components. So a particle space is occupied by those inflowing and out flowing waves that are intersecting and overlapping, and that action results in numerous high density wave intersections within the particle space. When we observe a particle, what we detect is the relatively dense complex wave pattern which includes the ever-changing pattern of high density spots produced as the three dimensional quantum level waves interact.

(206)
 
Please note Wellwisher, that when it comes to discussion, you don't have a history of participating, so I don't consider your posts as invitations to discuss any of my content. When you add content of your own, though interesting, unless you have an argument against some specific aspect of my model, I generally ignore it.

However, in this case you did bring up one thing that I will comment on, and that is where you said ...
wellwisher said:
The wave-particle duality does not imply an equivalency of particles and waves, because waves can occupy the same space but particles cannot.
Click to expand...
This comment is about the part where you say that particles cannot occupy the same space. Generally that is true at the wave energy densities of our customary surroundings where life can exist and function. The fact that particles cannot occupy the same space in those comfortable energy density environments is good; it is a consequence of natural law that is conducive to life.

But in the ISU, if you drop the temperature and therefore the energy density of the environment to near zero K, particles can collapse into each other's space. Also, in the ISU, when you increase the wave energy density of the local environment to its extreme, as in the case of a big crunch as it reaches "critical capacity", particles are forced into the same space which produces nature's most energetic response, i.e. the collapse/bang of a big crunch.

(218)
 
The fact that it seems like a year since any thoughtful arguments have been posted that address any specific aspect in the content of my model, confirms that I have pretty much researched and thought things through before I include speculations and hypotheses about them in the model. I continue to encourage that type of discussion, of course, but apparently there are no obvious internal inconsistencies, and no obvious cases where my content is inconsistent with well known and understood scientific observations and data; at least about the tpyes of things that are generally discussed at the layman level.

However, there are literally thousands of aspects of the cosmology of the universe that my model does not address. Therefore I'll try asking for ideas about aspects of cosmology that any member might be interested in seeing how I would address from the perspective of the ISU model.
 
Overview of ISU Speculations and Hypotheses

Universe has always existed and is infinite
No beginning and no great phase transitions; homogeneous and isotropic on a grand scale
The landscape of the greater universe is a multiple big bang arena landscape
The landscape is typified by an eternal "sameness" characterized by the process of big bang arena action
Big bang arenas have preconditions
Our Big Bang arena had preconditions consisting of two (or more) expanding big bang arenas that intersected, overlapped, and contributed portions of their galactic material to a big crunch that formed at the center of gravity of the overlap space
Big crunches collapse/bang into expanding arenas when "critical capacity" is reached
Crunches accumulate galactic material from the parent arenas until "critical capacity" occurs; nature's law of critical capacity is what keeps the whole universe from collapsing into one final "Big Crunch"
Critical capacity is the point were gravitational compression exceeds the ability of particles in the crunch to maintain their individual space
When the collapse occurs, particles give up their individual space and collapse toward a hot dense ball of wave energy that emerges as a new spherically expanding arena
The medium of space hosts spherical waves; an arena wave is nature's ultimate spherical wave, according to the ISU model
Spherical waves traversing the medium of space carry energy
Waves carry energy on a vast size/amount scale from the tiny wave energy at the quantum level to the big bang arena wave at the macro level
When a big crunch collapses, the core of the collapsing crunch represents nature's highest wave energy density environment
The core's dense state energy expands into the low density surrounding space as a result of the force of energy density equalization
As the dense state core expands, stable particles form as standing waves, with inflowing and out flowing wave energy components
The outflowing wave energy component from particles and objects supplies the inflowing wave energy component to surrounding particles and objects
The arena thus hosts the foundational particles; not fundament particles, because foundational particles differ in that they have internal composition
The internal composition in the particle space is the complex pattern of wave energy intersections that occur as inflowing and out flowing wave energy components intersect
As particles form, gravity arrises within the arena, and particles and objects move in the direction of the net highest source of wave energy
Simple atoms of hydrogen and helium form from the foundational particles as the expanding arena cools
Atoms clump in close quarters in the early expansion
As expansion plays out, the inverse square law accommodates the formation of huge separate hydrogen stars that burn rapidly and explode into dust clouds containing heavy nuclei
Stars and galaxies form out of the elements generated and contained in such clouds
Galaxy and galaxy groups, all moving away from each other, typify the maturing arena, as observed in our arena's Hubble view
The red shift data confirms an ongoing separation of galaxies and galaxy groups
The cosmic microwave background exists everywhere across the landscape of the greater universe and is the product of an eternal process of arena action
At any point in the background, wave energy of varying frequencies is coming and going in all directions
Motion in any direction, relative to the background, raises the energy density and therefore the temperature of the moving object, relative to the background temperature

That is about 25 aspects of the ISU for consideration.
 
Last edited:
quantum_wave said:
Please note Wellwisher, that when it comes to discussion, you don't have a history of participating, so I don't consider your posts as invitations to discuss any of my content. When you add content of your own, though interesting, unless you have an argument against some specific aspect of my model, I generally ignore it.

However, in this case you did bring up one thing that I will comment on, and that is where you said ...This comment is about the part where you say that particles cannot occupy the same space. Generally that is true at the wave energy densities of our customary surroundings where life can exist and function. The fact that particles cannot occupy the same space in those comfortable energy density environments is good; it is a consequence of natural law that is conducive to life.

But in the ISU, if you drop the temperature and therefore the energy density of the environment to near zero K, particles can collapse into each other's space. Also, in the ISU, when you increase the wave energy density of the local environment to its extreme, as in the case of a big crunch as it reaches "critical capacity", particles are forced into the same space which produces nature's most energetic response, i.e. the collapse/bang of a big crunch.

(218)
Click to expand...

Particles cannot occupy the same space. Particles will change phase as the pressure increases. Pressure allows new phases to appear that can get closer. Matter is both temperature and pressure dependent. Particle accelerator data is generated along an isobar. This can be misleading, since it does not reflect the pressure dependency of particles and therefore does not show how particle phases change. You are being consistent with science, but that science is lacking in terms of pressure/phase data thereby funneling conclusions the same way.

Picture the universe with nothing but waves that cancel, like in the wave tank. There would be nothing in inertial reference. There is stillness and the inertial space-time based universe is void, since all the energy within the waves, is hidden, via wave addition. To access that hidden energy we need a partition.

In the big crunch, since there is a blue shift, more and more energy is being revealed as the partition changes phase into something that can partition more and more.
 
wellwisher said:
Particles cannot occupy the same space. Particles will change phase as the pressure increases. Pressure allows new phases to appear that can get closer. Matter is both temperature and pressure dependent. Particle accelerator data is generated along an isobar. This can be misleading, since it does not reflect the pressure dependency of particles and therefore does not show how particle phases change. You are being consistent with science, but that science is lacking in terms of pressure/phase data thereby funneling conclusions the same way.

Picture the universe with nothing but waves that cancel, like in the wave tank. There would be nothing in inertial reference. There is stillness and the inertial space-time based universe is void, since all the energy within the waves, is hidden, via wave addition. To access that hidden energy we need a partition.

In the big crunch, since there is a blue shift, more and more energy is being revealed as the partition changes phase into something that can partition more and more.
Click to expand...
You didn't address my argument about the difference between two dimensional waves like on the surface of your wave generator tank, and spherical waves in the medium of space, so the partition idea doesn't hold water :).

Particles, under the conditions I referred to in my response to your last post, can share space. When temperature and pressure are at the extremes, there are violent consequences, i.e. they don't share space "willingly".
 
Let's take a closer look at the Overview of ISU Speculations and Hypotheses listed above:

The Infinite Spongy Universe (ISU) has always existed and is infinite

That premise is axiomatic in my view of the cosmology of the universe. I can't prove it, but it is a necessary initial condition or feature of the universe, from which are derived the more specific aspects of the ISU model.

A major aspect derived from the infinite and eternal existence of the universe is that there is a sameness to the universe, and that sameness has always been. The "sameness" refers to the major processes that perpetuate the universe as it is, and as it has always been. The major processes include Big Bang arena action at the macro level, and quantum action at the micro level.

The consequences of those two combined processes is the existence a universe that continually provides hospitable environments and the physical mechanisms for the generation, evolution, and hosting of life.

(330)
 
Last edited:
Continued ...

Big bang arenas have preconditions

When we look out into space, a prominent feature is our the Milky Way galaxy, spread across the night sky. We are all enthralled and amazed by the Hubble photographs, and especially the Hubble deep space view. As amazing as our Hubble view of the universe is, it is a tiny patch of visible space within a boundless greater universe, in this model.

The Hubble view reveals part of our Big Bang arena, but cosmologists agree that we cannot see it all. A lot of time passed after our Big Bang event, and before light generated within it started heading in all directions. By the time of the first light from our arena's stars and galaxies, the arena was already filled with a cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR). The background radiation is light that measures about 2.7 degrees Kelvin, and no matter where you are in the arena, it is coming and going in all directions.

The question I ask is, why just one Big Bang? Why not a greater universe where the infinite landscape hosts a perpetual "action process" of Big Bang arena formation. According to the ISU model, each arena would have similar preconditions consisting of two (or more) expanding parent big bang arenas much like our own, that intersected, and overlapped. Each parent arena contributed portions of their galactic material toward the center of gravity of the overlap space, and a big crunch began to form there.

But lest the entire greater universe fall into such a crunch, there is a natural limit of gravitational compression that particles can withstand before they are forced to give up their individual space, and collapse into a hot ball of dense state wave energy; the Big Bang.

When big crunches collapse/bang they burst into expanding arenas. Fueled by the force of energy density equalization, the hot dense ball of wave energy that emerges from the collapse/bang, immediately expands into the surrounding low energy density space occupied by the remnants of the parent arenas, and a new spherically expanding Big Bang arena wave is "born" into that same space. The new arena, like the parent arenas, is destined to mature into an expanding galaxy filled arena in its own right.

(351)
 
The main problem with dark matter and dark energy is these have never been seen in the lab to know if these are real or not. These are inferred from distance events. Since the criteria being used are only distant events, without lab proof, I could attribute these affects to an invisible giant, we can't see in the lab, either. Both are magic slight-of-hand, with dark matter and dark energy just a more credible illusion, until proven in the lab.

Dark energy and dark matter are needed because of flaws in the traditions. These are not needed if you assume the speed of light is the ground state of the universe and therefore this is where all things are heading, with many roads leading to the same place.

At the speed of light, the universe appears like a point-instant. Therefore any path that causes distance and time to contract heads in the direction of C. This can be due to SR; accelerated expansion, or GR and higher mass density. Higher mass density leads to pressure and mass burn; back to energy at C. All these things can happen together and can sometimes appear to conflict, yet forward progress back to C, is always being made.
 
Relative to the particle wave duality, waves can overlap without changing phase, while particles cannot overlap without changing phase. If we overlap atoms, with extreme pressure, we get a neutron density phase. This allows the particles to avoid overlap yet get closer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top