LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Instead of discussing the whole content of my paper
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lu5irtlxxe4hp ... .docx?dl=0
I was hoping maybe we could start with the first subject and ask one question at a time. The following was taken from part of the first two pages:
The debate over the nature of light and matter goes back to the 17th century when Isaac Newton and Christian Huygens offered conflicting theories. Newton proposed that light was made of particles while Huygens's theory consisted of waves.
For 350 years these competing theories have continued to develop as new experiments confirmed new ideas. Scientist such as Young, Planck, Einstein and many others have worked to compile the current scientific theory that all particles have a wave nature. In other words a wave particle duality.
I never gave it much thought and until recently had never even considered the double slit experiment. As you know there is a light source directed toward two narrow slits and a fringe pattern forms on a distant screen beyond. The fringe pattern is made of equally spaced bright and dark fringes and the phenomenon has intrigued many for centuries.
Often if not most of the time this concept is diagramed with overlapping semicircles representing waves as in the figure in this link.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/wfcmg0maax...mages.png?dl=0
The theory is that the two sets of waves overlap to form constructive and destructive interference. In figure 1 the lines with arrows follow the points where these wave amplitudes add up and project outward to where the interference is and will be. At the top of the image is a screen showing an equally spaced bright and dark fringe pattern.
In my line of work I do a lot of mechanical drawing but it doesn't take much to see that these projection lines do not match the fringe pattern. Diagrams like these are always set up in the same incorrect way. If you continue following the lines outward until they hit the screen you will see that they do not match or intersect with the equally spaced fringe patterns that are observed. Instead the spacing of the projected lines grows wider and wider as the fringe pattern stays equally spaced.
Most of these diagrams go out of their way to cover this up. For example in fig-1 the projection lines not only stop short of the screen but are intentionally stopped where they will line up vertically with the fringe pattern on the screen. This is misleading but you will find that most wave interference drawings seem to manipulate the outcome in the same way. It’s amazing to me that no one questions this.
In reality a fringe pattern formed by a pair of interfering waves (as with water) would have an intensity pattern that was not equally spaced. The simulator below accurately shows how constructive and destructive wave interference (as with water) would form unequal patterns with the spacings getting farther apart as they go out. My point is that a wave interference or diffraction theory of light cannot explain the equally spaced fringe patterns we actually observe in nature.
Click on Simulator by Roger G Tobin Two-source interference - GeoGebra Dynamic Worksheet
Anyway this got me to thinking about the wave theory in general. You can hardly find a description of light that does not include analogies of water waves or sound waves when explaining the slit experiment. I can understand how water or sound will form waves because there are multiple forces involved. With water there is the initial force pushing on a medium of water molecules. A wave crest forms as the displacement meets resistance but gravity pushes down on the crest countering the whole effect. There wouldn't even be a wave without gravity or any one of the other forces. As for sound waves they too have multiple forces including momentum, pressure and density differences.
Light doesn’t have any of these countering forces. The wave theory of light doesn’t even offer an explanation of these forces or a cause for the so called wave. The only descriptions given are Huygens and the uncertainty principle but again nothing to explain the forces. I believe Huygens or the uncertainty principles are unneeded complications. Infinite wave fronts and wavelets infinitely radiating out from…. what??
What bothers me the most about the wave theory of light is that most interpretations try to use the double slit experiment as proof that light cannot be a particle. I believe on the contrary that light is made up of particles and it's these same experiments that will prove it. With certainty
Originally Posted by Harold14370
