'Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day. But when I follow at my pleasure the serried multitude of the stars in their circular course, my feet no longer touch the earth.'
 
HomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 QM Double Slit

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: QM Double Slit   Thu Oct 10, 2013 7:04 pm

With the double slit experiment, you always hear: "an electron behaves both like a particle and a wave" or "an electron behaves now like a particle and then as a wave". That's misleadingly phrased.

When the electrons are quantized by influencing them from another frame of reference, their pattern of distribution is like that of particles, and if you do not influence them from this other spacetime frame, they distribute according to the logic of wavefunctions.

I think that the coherence of their arrival pattern is guaranteed only if their reference frame is left intact, when all that matters is the coherence between the charge of the source and the charge of the impact.

The electrons do not need to exist as such, they are only the transference of charge. If man insists on measuring this quantifyingly, the electrons which are actually measured as individual causal agents (detected) do not thereafter alter their quantized state. They have been brought into the context of another reference frame, and can not at the same time disregard this frame.

The pure frame involves only the charge (value) of the electron source, which is a turbulence, and its wavelike (highly interactive) distribution.



Analogical suggestion - value will distribute differently when it is quantized/monetized, then when it is distributed in a direct transaction, where the frame of reference is only the relation between giver and receiver. In this context we might say that "meaning" is left intact. I can imagine that this can be extrapolated to the quantum state, in the sense that, very broadly, "il n'y a pas de hors-texte" applies and the QM "weirdness" can be seen as a hermeneutical incompetence.

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: QM Double Slit   Thu Oct 10, 2013 7:58 pm

I can't grasp the math, but I grasp the logic of it, which seems implicit in relativity itself. We've established that c is the only constant which is present in all measurements. All measurements are based on this constancy.

The electrons are measured (experience to be present, affecting) by being exposed to c as relative to reference frame of the observer. Their behavior is thus bent to the measure of the observer, which is to say that they are, at that moment, electrons. We are necessarily measuring the electrons that apply to c as it is from our frame of reference, which means a distribution that is physically logical. But if this reference frame is not involved, there is no necessity for peak-quantity to appear as a click in a frame of reference, but simply the possibility of light from any frame of reference.

And equally as gravity is curved, the peaking and declining functions on the screen are representations of potentiating optimizations, self-accumulative (content to the second power), climaxing and silencing. The behavior of undetected electricity the behavior of potential itself reacting to itself. As soon as potential becomes manifest, it ceases to exist as part of the field it arose from. Similarly souls are born into matter and die into the Bitter Sea.

It leaves me wondering -  what is the contradiction between relativity and QM?

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: QM Double Slit   Thu Oct 10, 2013 8:22 pm

"Nature herself doesn't know where the electron will go".

- the electron as self-valuing will move in accordance to its context (its own valuing; direction-response-continuum), the electron as valued in terms of observer will go in accordance with the observers context.

Prediction without measurement is implicit, prediction with measurement is distribution.

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: QM Double Slit   Thu Oct 10, 2013 8:48 pm

It's only the nature of experimenting, not the nature of nature, that produces these anomalies.

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Thrasymachus
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3181
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Kekistan

PostSubject: Re: QM Double Slit   Thu Oct 10, 2013 9:42 pm

Yes I've read this before, it represents a thus-far insurmountable obstacle for experimental method in these instances, the fact that the experimental design itself is somehow setting up a "resonance" or "circuit" that is actually influencing/creating the anomalies. This has a name, but I can't remember it at the moment.

If quanta/light, "photons", are minimal valuing then they must take on the nature of that through which they move, they must be secondary values OR value-less to such a medium-frame. c would be an example of valuelessness of light with respect to another frame, to certain properties of a frame; double slit would be an example of absolute secondary value-assumption to another frame, to certain properties of a frame (namely, the experimental setup).

 

___________
"We must, now armed with such a language, realize the “transcendental unity of ideas,” through a new morality that aims, not to hypostasize experience and grasp in positive knowledge a series of particular virtues and vices, but rather to fully explicate this continuity; where philosophy exists to represent this transcendental order, morality most exist to mediate the two spheres, the spheres of experience and ideality." -Parodites

"Was it necessary for the sense of truth that Nietzsche described as developed by the Judeo-Christian tradition that then manifested itself in the scientific methodology to turn against the symbolic foundation of that structure and demolish it... Jung's answer was that the conflict between science and religion is a consequence of the immature state of both of those domains of thinking... it's just that we aren't good enough at being religious or at being scientific to see how they might be reconciled." -Jordan Peterson
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Thrasymachus
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3181
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Kekistan

PostSubject: Re: QM Double Slit   Thu Oct 10, 2013 9:45 pm

Therefore in the case of these experiments we get a strong-precise valuing (the human experimenting) encountering either an absolute self-value (e.g. c) or an absolute no-self-value (e.g. wave collapse, double slit anomalies). But this interesting question of how this interaction takes place and is even possible aside, what determines the difference between either absolute self-valuing of "light" or absolute no-self-valuing of "light"?

 

___________
"We must, now armed with such a language, realize the “transcendental unity of ideas,” through a new morality that aims, not to hypostasize experience and grasp in positive knowledge a series of particular virtues and vices, but rather to fully explicate this continuity; where philosophy exists to represent this transcendental order, morality most exist to mediate the two spheres, the spheres of experience and ideality." -Parodites

"Was it necessary for the sense of truth that Nietzsche described as developed by the Judeo-Christian tradition that then manifested itself in the scientific methodology to turn against the symbolic foundation of that structure and demolish it... Jung's answer was that the conflict between science and religion is a consequence of the immature state of both of those domains of thinking... it's just that we aren't good enough at being religious or at being scientific to see how they might be reconciled." -Jordan Peterson
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: QM Double Slit   Fri Oct 11, 2013 7:08 am

In philosophers terms, will to power.

The photons or electrons (I'll use photons here) moving through the slits are influenced by whatever material is calibrated to 'make sense of them' (hit them to draw specific energy from them) at the slits.

You can't measure the quanta at the slits without actually having something collide with them. The calibration of that 'hit' is set in terms of the experimenters reference frame.

It's important to note that only if they are successfully manipulated so as to affect the observer at the slits, then they are observed as quanta with sufficient individual momentum to behave as particles.

If the emitted measuring energy is so weak (emitting photons or whatever at too great intervals) as to miss a quantum, then the quantum does not behave accordingly to being influenced as a quantum.

It's very literal value ontological logic at work.

The how of this is implicit in the a priori definition of the required outcome. So we can pull a philosophers trick and reverse the phrasing of the conclusion of the experiment: The influence is only sufficient to disturb the interference pattern if it manages to quantize the light.

Light appears to not be "made of photons" per se, rather, photons are the minimal form in which light is measured as a unit.

A photon is the epistemic unit of light.

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Imafungi
bowstring
bowstring


Posts : 48
Join date : 2014-01-22

PostSubject: Re: QM Double Slit   Wed Jan 22, 2014 12:45 pm

Fixed Cross wrote:


It leaves me wondering -  what is the contradiction between relativity and QM?

The contradiction, has to do with gravity, its more of an undiscovered successful bridging of the two then a contradiction because I believe they are both successful in their own arenas, General relativity being a description of the macro phenomenon of gravity down to a certain small point, and QM being the descriptions of the most micro fundamentality of what the universe is made of. The problem, though it is posited Gravitons exist (which would be the particle of the gravity field, as Photons are the particle of the EM field) the problem is they cant experimentally access gravitons though I believe they are trying and have been. Because to discover the details of the particles of matter of nature we smash them together and observe their characteristics in scattering, This is more difficult to do in an effort to search for and grasp gravities physical essence because I think it has something to do with gravities physical essence being space itself, and what happens is we just create mini black holes...But I only know relative generalities about this topic so you would probably be better off asking google.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: QM Double Slit   Wed Sep 24, 2014 3:37 am

Imafungi wrote:
Fixed Cross wrote:


It leaves me wondering -  what is the contradiction between relativity and QM?

The contradiction, has to do with gravity, its more of an undiscovered successful bridging of the two then a contradiction because I believe they are both successful in their own arenas, General relativity being a description of the macro phenomenon of gravity down to a certain small point, and QM being the descriptions of the most micro fundamentality of what the universe is made of.  The problem, though it is posited Gravitons exist (which would be the particle of the gravity field, as Photons are the particle of the EM field) the problem is they cant experimentally access gravitons though I believe they are trying and have been.  Because to discover the details of the particles of matter of nature we smash them together and observe their characteristics in scattering, This is more difficult to do in an effort to search for and grasp gravities physical essence because I think it has something to do with gravities physical essence being space itself, and what happens is we just create mini black holes...But I only know relative generalities about this topic so you would probably be better off asking google.

This sounds plausible - it is like modern science to insist that gravity, which is the very manifestation of coherence and structuring, has itself 'particles' separate of the particles that 'have', are gravity.

Would Einsteins formula of mass and energy not be made into an irrelevancy by the existence of a particular gravity-carrier?

m = (e/c^2) + 'gravitons'...

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: QM Double Slit   

Back to top Go down
 
QM Double Slit
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Before The Light :: Tree :: Science-
Jump to: