PDA

View Full Version : Doesn this Hypothesis solve Quantum Mechanic's central Wave-Particle Duality problem?



MIL
2018-May-22, 09:04 PM
HYPOTHESIS FOR WAVE-PARTICLE DUALITY SOLUTION - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Author: Mikko Ilmari Laukkanen

This hypothesis provides a simple elegant mechanical solution to the central mystery of Quantum Mechanics - that of wave-particle duality - and thereby helps resolve the other mysteries of QM as well.

The Simplest Answer is Usually Correct - Occam's Razor

HYPOTHESIS Photons are particles which; contain energy, have mass, and therefore have electromagnetic properties and actions, including each an electromagnetic field that interacts with the electromagnetic fields of other photons and matter around them. The simple self-organizing behaviour and actions of electromagnetic particles results in what we label as ‘quantum phenomenon’ and ‘wave behaviour’ such as interference patterns.

PROPOSED DESCRIPTION OF PHOTONS

A photon is fundamentally very simple and can thus be described by a mechanical model.

Photons are real and of course can thus be described in a realist manner, (rather than only mathematically or statistically).

A photon is a particle, and is not itself a wave.

A photon has electromagnetic properties (i.e. electrical field and magnetic field), and has/is/carries energy.

These electromagnetic properties and their energy cause photons to interact with other photons in particular observable ways under certain circumstances.

These electromagnetic properties also cause photons to interact with other particles/matter/fields in certain ways.

Photons can reflect and diffract with other matter electromagnetically, (i.e. Van der Waals forces).

A description of photons as most likely being mechanically spinning dipole particles can fully explain the characteristics of light, including frequency, oscillation, wavelength, and polarization.

The electromagnetic interaction between spinning photons causes self-organization ‘behaviour patterns’ among photons.

This interaction between photons can cause certain observable phenomenon which can be described as or appears 'wave-like' in appearance - such as interference patterns.

As photons interact with fields and with the matter of the apparatus in double-slit experiments, it is simply the means of measurement which is altering the behaviour of the photons, not the photons ‘reading your mind about whether or not they are being watched’.

Photons have both momentum and mass (even if the mass is obviously very very small).

‘Entangled’ photons are not ‘communicating; with each other. But because photons do interact, they simply each had those paired properties separately prior to being emitted even and retain them thereafter, thus there is no ‘super-position’ of properties such as spin or polarization.

DOUBLE-SLIT EXPERIMENT INTERFERENCE BANDING EXPLANATION

Following the electromagnetic diffraction occurring at the beam-splitter, where the photon’s wavelength-phase in the two overlapping fringes are out-of-phase (and have sufficient electromagnetic contact time due to similar trajectories and at close-proximity), the photons repel each other apart resulting in a dark band.

And the photons creating the light bands had electromagnetically realigned themselves and possibly even attracted each other further to form relatively more coherent beams of photons in the places where we see the bright bands.

Accordingly, the light and dark interference bands are not created as a result of mathematical wave-function collapse and the photons within the dark band cancelling each other out. Rather, the photons had simply repelled and attracted each other via electromagnetic interaction of their positive and negative dipoles (which you might be more familiar with the description of these photon’s wavelengths being in-phase our out-of-phase, if you insist), and thus there simply are no photons landing within the dark band areas.

Please make sure you kindly do review the full-length paper here for comprehensive explanations, images, diagrams, and criticisms before offering criticisms.

< link redacted >

Swift
2018-May-22, 09:14 PM
MIL

First, welcome to CQ.

Second, you are obviously proposing a non-mainstream idea and so your thread has been moved to our Against The Mainstream (ATM) sub-forum. Non-mainstream ideas may only be presented here. Please also keep in mind that there are special rules that apply to this section that must be followed. I strongly suggest that you review the stickies at the top of the ATM forum and our rules (link in my signature), particularly rule 13.

Third, while you may link to other sites (such as the copy of your paper) you MUST present your idea fully here, and all questions put to you must be answered in this thread. You may not answer questions with responses such as "read my paper". If you are only using this forum to promote your paper, and are not willing to discuss it in detail here, you will be banned.

If you are not prepared to abide by all of this, please say so in your very next post; the thread will be closed, but you will not be infracted for any rule violations. By continuing, you are signaling that you agree to follow all of our rules.

Have fun.

John Mendenhall
2018-May-22, 09:59 PM
How about some math? For example, what is the upper limit to the mass of the photon?

Geo Kaplan
2018-May-22, 11:49 PM
HYPOTHESIS FOR WAVE-PARTICLE DUALITY SOLUTION - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Accordingly, the light and dark interference bands are not created as a result of mathematical wave-function collapse and the photons within the dark band cancelling each other out. Rather, the photons had simply repelled and attracted each other via electromagnetic interaction of their positive and negative dipoles (which you might be more familiar with the description of these photon’s wavelengths being in-phase our out-of-phase, if you insist), and thus there simply are no photons landing within the dark band areas.

Welcome to CQ, MIL.

I won't read your paper, but I will note that the explanation given above of the double slit experiment fails to explain why single-photon experiments also show interference patterns. So, too, do single-electron experiments as well as fullerenes. Electrons do not have a dipole structure (indeed, they have no structure, as far as experiment has been able to determine). But even if they did possess a dipole structure, it would not explain why single electrons shot at a double slit produce the well-known interference pattern.

Your proposal has several other deep -- fatally so -- flaws, but one suffices for now.

Reality Check
2018-May-23, 01:11 AM
HYPOTHESIS FOR WAVE-PARTICLE DUALITY SOLUTION - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Wave–particle duality (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave%E2%80%93particle_duality) is an experimental fact and already solved by QM.

Photons have no charge and so "repelled and attracted each other via electromagnetic interaction" is impossible.

There is no evidence that photons (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon) have mass. Special relativity shows that photons cannot have mass because they travel at the speed of light. Experiments have failed to measure a photon mass setting an upper limit of about 10-27 times that of a proton or neutron.

Wave–particle duality shows up in the double-slit experiment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment) even if a single photon at a time passes through the apparatus. This is easily seen for electrons in the images in the double-slit experiment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment) article.

Wave–particle duality does not just happen for photons. It happens for everything we have tested - photons, electrons, atoms and molecules.

Nikolay Sukhorukov
2018-May-23, 10:07 AM
Wave–particle duality shows up in the double-slit experiment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment) even if a single photon at a time passes through the apparatus. This is easily seen for electrons in the images in the double-slit experiment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment) article.


As far as I know, the wave properties of a particle are manifested when the particle size is comparable with the size of a gap. You want to say that in the Double-slit experiment the dimensions of the slits were approximately equal to the dimensions of a single photon or electron? Is it technically possible to create such a gap? Maybe it was just a misinterpretation of the experiment?



There is no evidence that photons have mass. Special relativity shows that photons cannot have mass because they travel at the speed of light.


It is not a fact. The rest mass of a particle and its inertial mass are two different things. A photon (if it does exist) may not obey the Lorentz factor.

Swift
2018-May-23, 05:53 PM
Nikolay Sukhorukov

ATM threads are not general discussion threads. Reality Check's points are for MIL to address and no one else. Nor are you allowed to help MIL with addressing them. If you want such a discussion, start your own thread.

Swift
2018-May-24, 06:24 PM
MIL

First, welcome to CQ.

Second, you are obviously proposing a non-mainstream idea and so your thread has been moved to our Against The Mainstream (ATM) sub-forum. Non-mainstream ideas may only be presented here. Please also keep in mind that there are special rules that apply to this section that must be followed. I strongly suggest that you review the stickies at the top of the ATM forum and our rules (link in my signature), particularly rule 13.

Third, while you may link to other sites (such as the copy of your paper) you MUST present your idea fully here, and all questions put to you must be answered in this thread. You may not answer questions with responses such as "read my paper". If you are only using this forum to promote your paper, and are not willing to discuss it in detail here, you will be banned.

If you are not prepared to abide by all of this, please say so in your very next post; the thread will be closed, but you will not be infracted for any rule violations. By continuing, you are signaling that you agree to follow all of our rules.

Have fun.
MIL

If you are just going to ignore this thread, and just use this forum to promote your linked paper, you will be infracted, the thread will be closed, and the link will be removed.

We all have busy lives, so I am hoping this is not the case and you will return shortly. We'll give you a few more days before that action is taken.

Swift
2018-May-29, 12:30 PM
MIL

If you are just going to ignore this thread, and just use this forum to promote your linked paper, you will be infracted, the thread will be closed, and the link will be removed.

We all have busy lives, so I am hoping this is not the case and you will return shortly. We'll give you a few more days before that action is taken.
As promised, this thread is closed, MIL is infracted.

MIL - You may not bring this topic up again on CQ without advance permission from the Moderation Team.