How Can the Photons Tolerate Each Other?
Published by Guest
05-13-2005
| | <!-- google_ad_section_start -->How Can the Photons Tolerate Each Other?<!-- google_ad_section_end --> Light is among the most complicated of all the mysterious phenomena in nature, so complicated that the deciphering of light will certainly be an “open sesame!” to a more progressive science and technology. This writing is an expedience for the purpose of violating the wave-energy theory of light by pure mathematics, taking into consideration the opinions I have set forth in an article titled "Interrelation of Standards and Industrial Development". The afore-mentioned article has been published online at the ToeQuest Research Library, http://www.toequest.com/library. Diffraction phenomenon is perhaps the most convincing evidence that light has a wave nature, because it has been explained to some extent by the wave theory of light. The diffraction pattern is formed when light from a distant point source vertically falls on a razor blade or on a circular aperture punched on an opaque plate. The writer believes the diffraction phenomenon (or the separation of light from darkness) could be justified by the photon-particle theory of light. In other words, I want to show that sometimes the cutting edge of reality is stranger than fiction. The photons or the quantum of energy, as a natural phenomenon with too large population, must have a natural behavior. Therefore, the quanta of energy, like many random variables that occur in nature, behave as though their distribution is normal or approximately normal. Because of this, here we use the Normal, or Gaussian, Distribution Law in the probability theory as our mathematical model in which the random variable is the energy of photon. The normal distribution is of theoretical importance because it can be used to approximate the distribution of many random phenomena. The sharp edge of a razor blade, or something like that, is a simulation of large quantity, but finite, of geometrical point sources forming a straight line. Along this line there isn't any distance between the adjoining sources. Consequently, the diffraction phenomenon appears only in the direction perpendicular to the blade's edge, on a screen parallel to the surface of blade. Let us suppose that the subject of our investigation is the photons of a monochromatic light in the range of E=Ē ± 3σ diffracted from the edge of a blade, as a linear source, and fall on the screen. We are going to study this random variable (quantum of energy) between Emin and Emax which includes 99.73% of the photons. Emax - Emin = E+3σ - E-3σ = 6σ = TE = Tolerance of random variable (Emax + Emin)/2 = Ē = Mean value (Mathematical Expectation) σ = Standard Deviation To prevent any misunderstanding arising from the use of synonyms in different regions of language, it is worthy of mention that here the phrase "Tolerance of random variable" is the same as "Uncertainty of random variable". To put it more clearly, TE is that very uncertainty in quanta of energy with the mean value equal to Ē, ∆E=6σ.
Here another hypothesis could be raised for explaining the diffraction phenomenon. Those photons having an energy more or less about Ē are compatible with each other and form their own collection around Ē. In fact, these photons with the largest population belong together and the average of their energy is equal to the most normal level. These kinds of photons can be categorized as the group "Cipher". Emin = E-3σ E-2σ E-1σ Ē E+1σ E+2σ E+3σ = Emax Quantum of Energy Some photons deviate from the normal level so that the average of their energy is one Standard Deviation more than the normal level (mean value). These photons form their own collection around E+1σ and have a population less than the group Cipher. They belong to the group "P1".E+1σ = Ē + 1σ But, there exist some other photons the average of their energy is one Standard Deviation less than the normal level. They belong to the group "M1" and gather around Ē-1σ. The population of this group is theoretically the same as that of the group P1.E-1σ = Ē - 1σ This principle is also valid for the formation of the groups P2, M2, P3 and M3. The average deviation of these groups from the Mathematical Expectation is +2σ, -2σ, +3σ and -3σ, accordingly. The distribution of all seven groups singly and jointly is normal. Beyond the range of tolerance (TE), the population of photons is so small which can be discussed later. The pattern of diffraction phenomenon could be more evident when two parallel linear sources with an optimum distance to be used. It can be simulated by a slit of about 0.15 mm width in an opaque plate. In this case, the diffraction patterns of both linear sources inversely coincide to and normalize the effect of each other. When the diffraction phenomenon appears by a circular aperture, the pattern is radial. In this case, the cutting edge of aperture plays the role of a ring-shaped source of light. This analysis shows us what has been known (measured) as the speed-of-light limit (c = 300,000km/s) is the speed of those photons having an energy very close to the mean value. Because, Ē is a Mathematical Expectation only and it never happens. Furthermore, in astronomical dimensions the probability of even these photons to travel in straight line is zero. The God not only does play dice, but has also created it. |  Latest 5 articles | | |
 Article Tools | | |
 Featured Articles | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This is WRONG (((Diffraction phenomenon is the most convincing evidence that light has a wave nature, because it has been explained to some extent by the wave theory of light. The diffraction pattern is formed when light from a distant point source vertically falls on a razor blade or on a circular aperture punched on an opaque plate. The writer believes the diffraction phenomenon (or the separation of light from darkness) could be justified by the photon-particle theory of light. In other words, I want to show that sometimes the cutting edge of reality is stranger than fiction.)))
I believe you have misunderstood diffraction. The diffraction referred to here should be the double slit experiment interference. | |
Last edited by dleviwing : 05-18-2005 at 02:30 PM.
Reason: removed quote statement.
|
By
Hamid
on
11-30-2005, 12:28 PM
| | Double Slit Experiment Please refer to the following thread. | | |
By
Hamid
on
11-30-2005, 12:30 PM
| | Double Slit Experiment and Quantum Mechanics In my opinion, the existing interpretation of the most beautiful experiment in physics has been founded on false knowledge.In this writing I want to interpret, in other form,the double slit experiment by diffraction phenomenon which is the manifestation of quantum mechanics and can find explanations in terms of the particle theory of light. Light diffraction phenomenon has a key role in double-slit experiment for producing the so called interference pattern. Because diffraction occurs in this experiment at two stages. But today, diffraction is explained by the wave theory of light on the basis of Huygens' principle. This theory had been advanced by Huygens and used by Young to explain double-slit interference and especially to deduce the wavelength of light. According to Huygens' principle, if a wave falls on a barrier that has an opening of dimensions similar to wavelength, the wave will flare out (diffract) into the region beyond the opening. Therefore, to investigate the so called "interference of two combining waves of light", we must first attain and comprehend the real cause of diffraction phenomenon. According to the reasoning set forth in my article and on the basis of the range and precision of measurement, the random variables in normal conditions break up by diffraction into seven main groups (clusters) with the following percentages of population: M3: 0.49 % , the portion within the range of measurement only, M2: 6.06 % M1: 24.17 % Ci: 38.29 % P1: 24.17 % P2: 6.06 % P3: 0.49 % , the portion within the range of measurement only. It seems in normal conditions this classification of random variables is the rule of cosmic order (natural democracy)! The mean value of group Cipher is the same as original mean value, while other groups have their own mean value. As a matter of fact, either of these groups or any section within the measurement's range (Ē ± 3σ) consists of seven other subgroups which could be detected only when we diffract them again, because in a narrower field, the standard deviation and population are not large enough to represent the sub-diffraction in original pattern. If, for example, we concentrate on group Cipher only we are going to investigate those photons which are in the range DZ1/2σ, in which the uncertainty is equal to σ and standard deviation is σ′=1/6σ. Now we can imagine two extremely narrow sections on second barrier (equal to the width of slits of double slit experiment) which are symmetrically very close to original mean value. Narrower tolerance or uncertainty also means much smaller population of photons. This is the case that occurs in double slit experiment. When either slit on second barrier is covered, a single smooth peak is observed on the screen, because of too small standard deviation and population. But when both slits are open, namely more different photons, a pattern of light and dark fringes is observed. Because in this case we have increased the standard deviation and doubled the linear sources of light which propagate sufficient number of photons needed for detecting the sub-diffraction pattern. As much as precise would be the measuring instrument, more precise sub-diffractions could be detected. Double slit experiment is in fact another evidence for particle theory of light and represents the sub-quantum structure. "Attar roamed the seven cities of love --- we are still just in one alley" (Rumi) | |
Last edited by Hamid : 11-19-2007 at 09:30 AM.
| | | | Re: How Can the Photons Tolerate Each Other? You are going to get mad at where this is going, again, sweetie.
I know you saw me collapse and you felt bad for me. But that is the quietest I know how to do that.
I'm tired too. I can make dimensions and all kinds of stuff with you, but without you, I lose interest fast.
I don't care how you arrive, and I know the difference between you and the other one. Sweetie, just kill all you want, I'll pick them up, maybe, if I feel like it. There is no pay for what we do, just more and more power, forever.
You and me, and all the things we know how to do. I adore your work, and you obviously like mine, so what's the problem, baby.
Just ask and I will obey you, sort of, and just demand and I will obey you, sort of, just like always. | | |
By
Hamid
on
11-16-2007, 04:01 AM
| | A reply to michellemfry "The great physicist Richard Feynman has described the double-slit experiment as encapsulating the "central mystery" and the "heart" of quantum physics. Fortunately for us, Feynman goes on to describe this experiment as containing "the only mystery …. the basic peculiarities of all" quantum physics. So imagine how much is learned by understanding the double-slit experiment!" Quoted from new physics and the mind "Coming up with new questions, discovering new possibilities, approaching old problems from new perspective, requires a creative imagination and is the sign of new progress in science." -Albert Einstein "O beautiful wine-bearer, bring forth the cup and put it to my lips Path of love seemed easy at first, what came was many hardships. With its perfume, the morning breeze unlocks those beautiful locks The curl of those dark ringlets, many hearts to shreds strips. In the house of my Beloved, how can I enjoy the feast Since the church bells call the call that for pilgrimage equips. With wine color your robe, one of the old Magi’s best tips Trust in this traveler’s tips, who knows of many paths and trips. The dark midnight, fearful waves, and the tempestuous whirlpool How can he know of our state, while ports house his unladen ships. I followed my own path of love, and now I am in bad repute How can a secret remain veiled, if from every tongue it drips? If His presence you seek, Hafiz, then why yourself eclipse? Stick to the One you know, let go of imaginary trips." -Hafiz Translated from Persian into English by Shahriar Shahriari | |
Last edited by Hamid : 11-19-2007 at 10:13 AM.
|
By
Hamid
on
01-11-2008, 04:15 AM
| | Burnt City "Burnt City," 3200-2100 BC "The discovery of backgammon in the Burnt City proves that science and industry originated from here and spread to other areas,". | | |
By
Hamid
on
05-17-2008, 11:15 AM
| | Definition of Uncertainty Some physicists, disappointed with so called Heisenberg uncertainty principle, believe that uncertainty is that very standard deviation (σ). Usually they don't say anything about scientific basis of their opinion. After a long period of time I found the most important origin of this misunderstanding. Apparently, old definition and meaning of uncertainty which has been stated by NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) is a source of this mistake. You will find below what has been said by NIST. Standard Uncertainty and Relative Standard Uncertainty Definitions The standard uncertainty u(y) of a measurement result y is the estimated standard deviation of y. The relative standard uncertainty ur(y) of a measurement result y is defined by ur(y) = u(y)/|y|, where y is not equal to 0. Meaning of uncertainty If the probability distribution characterized by the measurement result y and its standard uncertainty u(y) is approximately normal (Gaussian), and u(y) is a reliable estimate of the standard deviation of y, then the interval y - u(y) to y + u(y) is expected to encompass approximately 68 % of the distribution of values that could reasonably be attributed to the value of the quantity Y of which y is an estimate. This implies that it is believed with an approximate level of confidence of 68 % that Y is greater than or equal to y - u(y), and is less than or equal to y + u(y), which is commonly written as Y= y ± u(y). It is worthy of mention that there are important similarities between what has been stated by NIST and my explanation of uncertainty, of course there are considerable discrepancies as well. In my opinion, definition of standard uncertainty mentioned by NIST is not scientific and normal because there isn't any fact, observation or experimentation to verify it. Based on my knowledge, standard uncertainty can be defined as follows: The standard uncertainty ux of a measurement result X is equal to six standard deviation of X, i.e. ux = 6σx . If x would be the mean value of the measurement result, then X=x ± 3σx . Standard uncertainty or Natural Tolerance =Xmax – Xmin= 6σx | |
Last edited by Hamid : 05-22-2008 at 11:17 AM.
| | | | Re: Definition of Uncertainty Hamid;
The only way to scientifically test a mathematical methodology is to collect data and apply the methodology with the greatest number of data points possible. As a contributor to NIST’s data base and methodology I can only suggest you acquire a reputable engineering degree from an accredited academic institute. Yours seems to have failed to teach you the proper mathematical methodologies and the definitions of the terms. | | |
By
Hamid
on
05-19-2008, 10:04 AM
| | Re: Definition of Uncertainty Hello dleviwing; A comprehensive cognition of a specific phenomenon can not be ascertained through examining its general aspects only, especially if it is intended to modify or develop the phenomenon in question careful consideration of the relevant details is a must, too. I usually try to use the above criterion for finding out the truth and for evaluating different opinions and claims. It is more valuable, reasonable and natural to recognize a TOE encompassing 99.73% of different points of view and dissimilar sciences, not 68%, a percentage which has been stated by NIST. Hopefully you will confirm that it is a very hard work. If I could add even a sentence or a formula to human's knowledge, I would be more grateful to my teachers. Hamid | |
Last edited by Hamid : 07-16-2008 at 11:28 PM.
| |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Article: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | | | | Article Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new articles You may not post comments You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8 Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com | |