What is the current explenation for the double slit experiment?

[Billy T]

welcome to sciforums.

... I can't stop thinking about the statements about the photon having no time and its passage is instantaneous in its own frame and such. Relativity people even say that photons see the distance between one side of the universe and the other as infinitely contracted to effective zero even though they travel form one point in the universe to the other at finite speed.

I have never heard that said, but if there were nothing existing for the photon to "pass by at the speed of light" in x seconds, but only the photon its self perhaps that could be said. After all time is only associated with the change of something, not anything that can be observed to pass without reference to other things.

... If the electromagnetic field exists between ends of the universe...

There are no "ends of the universe", so it is hard to know what is being claimed or said. As I said in post 11, the photon is not the small point like ball of energy many think of it as, it has lenght but normally less than a meter. The "sodium D" photons I measured many years ago were ~30 cm long. Although if the photon source is a very rarefied gas and if the transion probability / rate between upper and lower states is very low or slow, then the photon can be at least several meters long. Like the red and green oxygen lines of the Northern Lights are. Perhaps that red line photon is 30 meters long - I have never seen data on this but it certainly is significantly longer than the very long green line. Not because red light wavelength is greater than that of green light line. It is fact the transition rate of the red line is about three times slower than that of the green line, as I recall.

 

[Undefined]

welcome to sciforums. I have never heard that said, but if there were nothing existing for the photon to "pass by at the speed of light" in x seconds, but only the photon its self perhaps that could be said. After all time is only associated with the change of something, not anything that can be observed to pass without reference to other things.There are no "ends of the universe", so it is hard to know what is being claimed or said. As I said in post 11, the photon is not the small point like ball of energy many think of it as, it has lenght but normally less than a meter. The "sodium D" photons I measured many years ago were ~30 cm long. Although if the photon source is a very rarefied gas and if the transion probability / rate between upper and lower states is very low or slow, then the photon can be at least several meters long. Like the red and green oxygen lines of the Northern Lights are. Perhaps that red line photon is 30 meters long - I have never seen data on this but it certainly is significantly longer than the very long green line. Not because red light wavelength is greater than that of green light line. It is fact the transition rate of the red line is about three times slower than that of the green line, as I recall.

Thanks Billy T.
I am surprised that you have never heard of it said that way. My own naive understandings are that the electromagnetic field pervades all space and that photons (or em radiations) are perturbations of that field which propagate across that em field by mutual induction of the magnetic and then electric components of the combined em field. Is that not correct understanding?
By "the ends of the universe" I mean the opposing observational horizons from one horizon to the other. In other words a very long space distance along an all pervading e-m field between. I did not mean a photon is that long. Nor that the universe is known to have ends to it in any way in any direction.
The passing of a photon is along the all-pervading e-m field itself in which it is the fluctuating by oscillating Electric and Magnetic components of that field that creates the photon movement with respect to that field across the universe.
And it takes time for each oscillation to succeed the other all the way along with respect to the field overall. Basically I understand that the photon's oscillations or time ticks with respect to the field, so the photon can't really be "timeless" like I often hear said.
I hope that this makes it more clear for what I wanted the answers to lessen my confusion about "timeless photon" and such like, Billy T?

 

[Brainiac]

It was brought to my attention that there already is a satisfactory theory explaining what was once considered an unknown phenomenon.
What is it?

It is not a mysterious phenomenon that's for sure.

 

[river]

The interesting thing about the double slit experiment is that what shows up on the screen is a elongated pattern which suggests to me , the three dimensional wave which is latitudinal in direction

Which means that waves made by the photon move out not just forward but side ways as well

And at peak energy then give the elongated pattern

 

[Billy T]

Thanks Billy T.
... the electromagnetic field pervades all space and that photons (or em radiations) are perturbations of that field which propagate across that em field by mutual induction of the magnetic and then electric components of the combined em field. Is that not correct understanding?... The passing of a photon is along the all-pervading e-m field itself...

I think you have concept for an EM field though out all space that photos (or micro waves, etc) distort of "wiggel." The photon or the microwave IS the EM field, not something separate from the EM field.

There probably is some tiny energy density several wavelenths transverse to the directions of propagation, but it is rapidly decreassing, not above noise levels 100 wave lengths to the side, would be my guess.

 

[Undefined]

I think you have concept for an EM field though out all space that photons (or micro waves, etc) distort of "wiggel." The photon or the microwave IS the EM field, not something separate from the EM field.

There probably is some tiny energy density several wavelengths transverse to the directions of propagation, but it is rapidly decreassing, not above noise levels 100 wave lengths to the side, would be my guess.

Thanks Billy T. I understand the Electro-magnetic Field (background energy field) is one thing and the Photon (boson particle-wave quantum perturbation of that field) is another. Just as the Higgs Field (another background energy field) is one thing and the Higgs Boson (the particle-wave boson quantum perturbation of the field) is another. It is on that understanding (of the different aspects of a field and a traveling disturbance along that field) that I asked about the Time Rate involved in the Oscillating Process (alternate induction of the electric and magnetic components) of the photonic perturbation. It is the photonic perturbation that propagates by that process (as described in my original Wiki reference) from one side of the observable universe to the other. Wiki effectively says the photon's repeated inducing of first electric then magnetic components of that pre existing e-m field causes or allows the photon (e-m field perturbation quanta wave-particle) to propagate across space from wherever in the all pervading e-m field it was created and emitted. Am I now clearer what and why I asked in my first post?

 

[Billy T]

Thanks Billy T. I understand the Electro-magnetic Field (background energy field) is one thing and the Photon (boson particle-wave quantum perturbation of that field) is another. Just as the Higgs Field (another background energy field) is one thing and the Higgs Boson (the particle-wave boson quantum perturbation of the field) is another. It is on that understanding (of the different aspects of a field and a traveling disturbance along that field) that I asked about the Time Rate involved in the Oscillating Process (alternate induction of the electric and magnetic components) of the photonic perturbation. It is the photonic perturbation that propagates by that process (as described in my original Wiki reference) from one side of the observable universe to the other. Wiki effectively says the photon's repeated inducing of first electric then magnetic components of that pre existing e-m field causes or allows the photon (e-m field perturbation quanta wave-particle) to propagate across space from wherever in the all pervading e-m field it was created and emitted. Am I now clearer what and why I asked in my first post?

No, you still have the wrong idea - there is no EM throughout all space, The radio waves, microwaves, photons, and the badly mis named gama rays are all EM waves of different frequencies. When none of them exist there is NO EM field.

 

[Undefined]

No, you still have the wrong idea - there is no EM throughout all space, The radio waves, microwaves, photons, and the badly mis named gama rays are all EM waves of different frequencies. When none of them exist there is NO EM field.

I see what you are getting at. Then can you tell me how that sort of understanding (no pre-existing background e-m field) extends to the Higgs field and the Higgs Bosons understanding? Does it work the same way? I mean, is it all the hypothetical Higgs Bosons that make up the hypothetical Higgs field? If so where do all the Higgs Bosons come from and how are they surviving long enough to together make up a field of them everywhere in space which certain particles interact with for gaining and keeping mass property all the time? Or is a Higgs field and em field different (even though photon is also a boson as Higgs is boson too?). Thanks for your help and patience Billy T.

 

[Billy T]

I see what you are getting at. Then can you tell me how that sort of understanding (no pre-existing background e-m field) extends to the Higgs field and the Higgs Bosons understanding? Does it work the same way? I mean, is it all the hypothetical Higgs Bosons that make up the hypothetical Higgs field? If so where do all the Higgs Bosons come from and how are they surviving long enough to together make up a field of them everywhere in space which certain particles interact with for gaining and keeping mass property all the time? Or is a Higgs field and em field different (even though photon is also a boson as Higgs is boson too?). Thanks for your help and patience Billy T.

I am not well versed in QED (quantum electro dynamics) but generally speaking all of the forces than "seem to magically" act at a distance, do so by the exchange of "virutal particles." I assume that the Higgs particle is the virtual particle of the gravitational field but you need to read up on this to understand better.

Two electrons with trajectories that would collide at same point never get there; almost by magic they act upon each other to scatter without any actual collison. In the "standard theory" they exchange a "virtual photon" to modify their trajectories.

The electromagnetic force can be described by the exchange of virtual photons.
The nuclear force binding protons and neutrons can be described by an effective field of which mesons are the excitations.
At sufficiently large energies, the strong interaction between quarks can be described by the exchange of virtual gluons.
Beta decay is an example of an interaction due to the exchange of a W boson, but not an example of a force.
Gravitation may be due to the exchange of virtual gravitons.

All the forces except gravity are now (for a few decades) understood with the same theoretical model. I forget why Gravity can not be included in that model.


Read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_carrier

 

[cosmictotem]

The reason why a single photon can appear in more than one place at a time is analogous to an array of LED lights that can light up at the same time. Imagine all of space/time is filled with these LED lights. Every coordinate in space/time has its own LED bulb to represent that point. But most of them are not ON, so we can't see them. Let's call them dark matter. All of space/time is filled with these bulbs and, although it appears to us empty space exists, there really is no empty space at all. It's all taken up and filled.

Now to turn on one of these LED bulbs, energy has to pass through it. So when you see or detect a photon, that is energy moving through one of the previously OFF LED bulbs.

Now since each of these LED bulbs represent every single possible path a wave or particle of energy can take, that means all the possible routes an energy wave/particle can take are already layed out ahead of time by the laws and physics of the Universe.

So when you introduce the slit, it is acting as a switch that is "turning ON" some of those other infinitely possible paths of the energy wave.

Any time we can see something, it is just energy in motion, lighting up paths in space/time occupied by these invisible LED bulbs that fill all of space/time.

So when our minds object and say "The photon can't be here and there at the same time.", yes it can because it already is there and everywhere...

 

[Billy T]

The reason why a single photon can appear in more than one place at a time is analogous to an array of LED lights that can light up at the same time. Imagine all of space/time is filled with these LED lights. Every coordinate in space/time has its own LED bulb to represent that point. But most of them are not ON, so we can't see them. Let's call them dark matter. All of space/time is filled with these bulbs and, although it appears to us empty space exists, there really is no empty space at all. It's all taken up and filled.

Now to turn on one of these LED bulbs, energy has to pass through it. So when you see or detect a photon, that is energy moving through one of the previously OFF LED bulbs.

Now since each of these LED bulbs represent every single possible path a wave or particle of energy can take, that means all the possible routes an energy wave/particle can take are already layed out ahead of time by the laws and physics of the Universe.

So when you introduce the slit, it is acting as a switch that is "turning ON" some of those other infinitely possible paths of the energy wave.

Any time we can see something, it is just energy in motion, lighting up paths in space/time occupied by these invisible LED bulbs that fill all of space/time.

So when our minds object and say "The photon can't be here and there at the same time.", yes it can because it already is there and everywhere...

An ammusing invetion, but it does not agree with the fact light travels in straight line. LED n+1 needs somehow to know what direction the light from LED n was traveling.

There is a more complex problem with that idea too. Classical physics is time reversible. I.e. any device that can emit light can also absorb light. So you idea the "off LEDs" are dark matter is cleary false as dark matter does not absorb light but "off LEDs" would.

There is still a third problem: photon have measurable lenght. The Sodium D photons I measured many years ago were about 30cm long. Some from well isolated (near vacuum) radiating atoms can be many meters long. For example the photons of red and green lines of the Nortern Lights are at least 5 meters long. (The red one is longer than the green one by at least a meter.)

That "Photons have length." fact is incompatable with your idea that the LEDs are very tiny (vanishingly small) and at every point in the universe, and with the fact (#4) that dark matter is known to be concentrated is specific regions.

As they say in Baseball: Four strikes and your out.

 

[Undefined]

I am not well versed in QED (quantum electro dynamics) but generally speaking all of the forces than "seem to magically" act at a distance, do so by the exchange of "virutal particles." I assume that the Higgs particle is the virtual particle of the gravitational field but you need to read up on this to understand better.
Two electrons with trajectories that would collide at same point never get there; almost by magic they act upon each other to scatter without any actual collison. In the "standard theory" they exchange a "virtual photon" to modify their trajectories.

The electromagnetic force can be described by the exchange of virtual photons.
The nuclear force binding protons and neutrons can be described by an effective field of which mesons are the excitations.
At sufficiently large energies, the strong interaction between quarks can be described by the exchange of virtual gluons.
Beta decay is an example of an interaction due to the exchange of a W boson, but not an example of a force.
Gravitation may be due to the exchange of virtual gravitons.

All the forces except gravity are now (for a few decades) understood with the same theoretical model. I forget why Gravity can not be included in that model.


Read more here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_carrier

I'm not sure what you are responding to here. I just wanted some views on what fields exist in space and how they are timeless or not. I quoted wiki and pointed out that the field photonic perturbation propagates like I and wiki described. About universal coverage of fields, in QM the quantum vacuum is an all pervading fundamental fields space which have virtual perturbations (virtual photons and other things) as well as persistent perturbations (real photons and other things) which exist and move in that quantum vacuum background of fundamental fields. I just wanted to know how a photon can be considered by some as "timeless" if a photon is an internal oscillation "package" perturbation like I originally described, which propagates by that means in real time "clock rate oscillation process" across the universal space along the fundamental fields which pre-existed before that photon was created and emitted? Can anyone answer just that question about photon really "timeless" or not considering its internal E-M field oscillation at a certain "clock rate" or "frequency" during traveling space distances?

 

[Robittybob1]

I'm not sure what you are responding to here. I just wanted some views on what fields exist in space and how they are timeless or not. I quoted wiki and pointed out that the field photonic perturbation propagates like I and wiki described. About universal coverage of fields, in QM the quantum vacuum is an all pervading fundamental fields space which have virtual perturbations (virtual photons and other things) as well as persistent perturbations (real photons and other things) which exist and move in that quantum vacuum background of fundamental fields. I just wanted to know how a photon can be considered by some as "timeless" if a photon is an internal oscillation "package" perturbation like I originally described, which propagates by that means in real time "clock rate oscillation process" across the universal space along the fundamental fields which pre-existed before that photon was created and emitted? Can anyone answer just that question about photon really "timeless" or not considering its internal E-M field oscillation at a certain "clock rate" or "frequency" during traveling space distances?

I think this is a very good question, for it goes right to the depth of intuition in order to understand what is happening. (In fact I hope I have understood your Q).
If you understand GR or is it SR, you know relativity in general say, with its time dilation and length contraction and apply that to light, that is what results.
So light vibrates to us, but it doesn't in its own frame. A mystery to me too.

 

[cosmictotem]

An ammusing invetion, but it does not agree with the fact light travels in straight line. LED n+1 needs somehow to know what direction the light from LED n was traveling.

There is a more complex problem with that idea too. Classical physics is time reversible. I.e. any device that can emit light can also absorb light. So you idea the "off LEDs" are dark matter is cleary false as dark matter does not absorb light but "off LEDs" would.

There is still a third problem: photon have measurable lenght. The Sodium D photons I measured many years ago were about 30cm long. Some from well isolated (near vacuum) radiating atoms can be many meters long. For example the photons of red and green lines of the Nortern Lights are at least 5 meters long. (The red one is longer than the green one by at least a meter.)

That "Photons have length." fact is incompatable with your idea that the LEDs are very tiny (vanishingly small) and at every point in the universe, and with the fact (#4) that dark matter is known to be concentrated is specific regions.

As they say in Baseball: Four strikes and your out.

Hey, at least you gave it a consideration...so I can't complain.

And if you can salvage anything from my hypotheses (with modifications, of course) to make it workable, you're welcome to use it.