Quantum Physics Double Slit Experiment - Page 2

In case you answered no

Ah, IronWood that was a great beginning for the New Year, I really needed a good laugh this morning. Thank You for that 1st video. As for the second well it wasn't as entertainning. Besides the first statement, the line between 2 points being 1 dimensional maybe true but the first dimension would be the point & the second would be the (strait) line between them.

Just a thought but . . . photon emission is stated as the result of a single electron then the aspect of elements having particular spectral emissions then the line spectrum must be the results of the electrons within the outer orbitals?
Funny thing is I was thinking what if suppose an element, tungsten were to be subjected to higher frequency energy than those of the emitted frequency of light? Would it absorb that energy or does it only absorb the energy (frequency) of the line spectrum . . . On the other hand,
Elements like tungsten have interior (closed=>sub shells) containing electrons. Then these electrons would have smaller orbitals => higher frequency resonance therefore might absorb other frequencies? Of course, being within the closed energy shells, they are not bound simply internally bound but are exteriorly bound by the outer shell then may be these electrons being more tightly bound produce a plasma like effect resulting in the emission of electro-magnetic energy to the outer electrons producing the characteristic line spectrum? Hmm . . then the laws of physics (electron/ hole flow) dealing with electronics would become almost a logical consequence (deduction)?

I was thinking what a paradox the emission of electro-magnetic radition represent?
On one hand, Defined by the relationship of frequency & wavelength then the higher the frequency of radition => shorter the distance between any two points because the higher the frequency the straiter the line connecting there centers
On the other, an aspect of the "RainBow" indicates that higher frequencies would out-distance lower frequencies before bending (turning) them back. . . only thing is I wouldn't say that light circle the universe as much as it spirals back as the electron emitting the photon?
The same aspect that produces the shortest & the longest distance (path) through our universe (existance) or what is a strait line in a curved universe . . the one with the highest frequency.

Ah . . Oh, you know about the misconception can arise when science & fiction co-mingle

quote:

---

what is a strait line in a curved universe . . the one with the highest frequency. . . Well at least for systems based upon electromagnetic radiation as the probe, by which we meter (define) space?

---

Think about about all the B.S. promoting the aspect of traveling at the speed of light?
Does traveling at the speed of light mean that like E-M radiation that we would pass through normally solid objects?

The frequency range of an emission determines that x-rays produce a skeleton image . . . the flesh may seem more like a cloud or vague form around the skeleton but we would still feel and grasp the flesh?
So is it the speed of light or the frequency?
Inertial mass produces e-m radiation, [axiom] non-inertial mass (quantum of energy) => has no inertia therefore instanteous acceleration too maximum velocity?

quote:

---

Inertial mass produces e-m radiation, [axiom] non-inertial mass (quantum of energy) => has no inertia therefore instantaneous acceleration too maximum velocity?

---

Ah but Relativity would {does} apply to this statement ?
1) non-inertial mass (quantum of energy) => has no inertia therefore instantaneous deceleration to zero velocity . .0. .
no velocity because it is characteristic of an inertial system of Mass?
2) or (then) relativistically, inertial mass systems spins around the non inertial systems? As long as they spin around the same center point ?

I was once told that matter remains "lifeless" and unformed until the light of consciousness animates it into some conceptualized form or identity. Matter, according my friend's reasoning, has no cognitive identity, no conceptual meaning until consciousness, or rather, mind, gives it that identity or meaning. Which is like saying a cat does not exist until the human mind gives it, the matter, the "conceptual form" of a cat. I don't know if I completely get that but, well, there it is.

Native Tradition speaks of the being Inktomi that tends to run something like that as I recall. . .

quote:

---

I was once told that matter remains "lifeless" and unformed until the light of consciousness animates it into some conceptualized form or identity.

---

What is that string theory or something?

quote:

---

relativistically, inertial mass systems spins around the non inertial systems? As long as they spin around the same center point . . . Inertial mass produces e-m radiation, [axiom] non-inertial mass (quantum of energy) => has no inertia therefore instantaneous acceleration too maximum velocity?

---

Actually the concept has better thread application in regard to "Absolute Zero" . . .orbitals are inertial particles but they are also charged particles. Our perception of orbitals represent the distribution of these particles based on the intersection of prescribed inertial forces with the related configurations due to {as an aspect of interaction of charged particles} charge.
But then shell theory that each subshell becomes closed as the orbitals are filled . . but instead of thinking of shells being separated by distance; we should rather related it to frequency being the source of the barrier that exist between shells as well as thier component subshells

quote:

---

One basic principle behind the double slit experiment is that particles are in fact waves.
This would define all matter as waves. Energy is already defined as being in wave form. Therefore, everything is waves. Even thoughts.
1:47:37 am - February 14, 2007
"Hating everyone protects me from elitism."

---

Ah, yes electrons have both inertial mass & charge therefore they would be effected by the electromagnetic as well as electrostatic charge? So one would expect an electrostatic charge on the material composition of the slit as well as the electromagnetic field produced of the matter composing would tend to deflect electrons as they passed near (through) the slit (s)?

quote:

---

One basic principle behind the double slit experiment is that particles are in fact waves.
This would define all matter as waves. Energy is already defined as being in waveform. Therefore, everything is waves. Even thoughts.
1:47:37 am - February 14, 2007
"Hating everyone protects me from elitism."

---

Ah, but 'Therefore, everything is waves' does having waves mean they are waves? You have made a valid statements, 'electrons have both inertial mass & charge'. Then we could state they are matter? Photons have waves, are they matter? Oceans' have waves but they are composed of salts & water.
We remove the water and what remain are salts.. . as a solid block of salt. Physics states that it has a specific weight or mass and chemistry states that it contains moles of salt and its molecular composition.
Ratio & Proportions are validating aspect; one mole of water produces one mole of oxygen & two moles of hydrogen... Inherent to the theory of the atoms is that matter can be reduced to the point that retains the [properties] original matter. We can grind the salt rock down to the molecular level? No, but we can dissolved it in water reducing it to that level?

quote:

---

'WEBSTER'S NEW WORLD DICTIONARY OF SCIENCE'

Hmm, 'mass in physics, the quantity in a body as measured by inertia' . . 'matter in physics, anything that has mass and can be detected and can be measured'
. . . 'All matter is made up of =>atoms, which in turn are made up of =>elementary particles; it exist ordinarily as a solid, liquid or gases.'
'The history of Science & Philosophy is largely taken up of accounts of theories of matter, ranging from the hard 'atoms' of Democritus to the 'waves' of modern quantum theory.'

---

Ah, not only can the atomos exist but also ,yes, it does exist . . . at that level. But then quantum of the shell theory states that not only that they exist but that they coexist? Although matter has many forms exist . . . or rather they exist relative to each other? Thing is the atomos theory is at the end of the cutting processing, what do you find: another particle (s)?
Not particles but particle-system(s) which form our existence?

quote:

---

Relativisticly speaking, inertial mass systems spins around its' center , a non-inertial systems? As long as they spin around the same center point . . . charged inertial particles produces e-m (fields) radiation, [axiom] non-inertial mass => has no inertia therefore no acceleration?

---

Some times I really have wonder why people will do the things they do.
I have an austic child/adult. So one day aas we ride along, he points at the lights along the road and states,

quote:

---

"Light Broke".

---

Now, he spat these words out but I was happy that he was indeed forming simple sentences . . . But then I started thinking 'he needs to understand the difference between the light being broke & the light being switched off.So I replied, "light off" and pointed to the lights. To which he points at the lights along the road and states,

quote:

---

"Light Broke".

---

This goes on for a while so I am getting frustrated when I notice that he has this mischievious smile on his face and h seems to be getting a big kick out of it.
Relativisticly speaking, inertial mass systems spins around its' center , a non-inertial systems? As long as they spin around the same center point . . . charge produces e-m (fields) radiation, [axiom] non-inertial mass => has no inertia therefore no acceleration: maximum velocity?[quote] But then shell theory that each subshell becomes closed as the orbitals are filled; instead of thinking of shells being separated by distance; we should rather relate it as frequency, being the source of the barrier that exist between shells and component, sub shells.[quote] So 2p orbitals individually form 3 - 1s orbitals & a 2s orbital to form the 2nd shell . . {note that a P orbital act like an S orbital in that it forms a closed shell when filled}. . I wonder is more like the 2nd/3rd shells are composed of 4 – 1s orbitals being representative of an inert gas configuration? The 1st orbital configuration generates electro-magnetic fields extending in all (3- dimensions) directions.
Looking at the Periodic Table, I think they should have made it into a triangular (pyramid) form.

Ah, but 'Therefore, everything is waves' does having waves mean they are waves? You have made a valid statements, 'electrons have both inertial mass & charge'. Then we could state they are matter? Photons have waves, are they matter? Oceans' have waves but they are composed of salts & water.
We remove the water and what remain are salts.. . as a solid block of salt. Physics states that it has a specific weight or mass and chemistry states that it contains moles of salt and its molecular composition.
Ratio & Proportions are validating aspect; one mole of water produces one mole of oxygen & two moles of hydrogen... Inherent to the theory of the atoms is that matter can be reduced to the point that retains the [properties] original matter. We can grind the salt rock down to the molecular level? No, but we can dissolved it in water reducing it to that level?
QUOTE: 'WEBSTER'S NEW WORLD DICTIONARY OF SCIENCE'

Hmm, 'mass in physics, the quantity in a body as measured by inertia' . . 'matter in physics, anything that has mass and can be detected and can be measured'
. . . 'All matter is made up of =>atoms, which in turn are made up of =>elementary particles; it exist ordinarily as a solid, liquid or gases.'
'The history of Science & Philosophy is largely taken up of accounts of theories of matter, ranging from the hard 'atoms' of Democritus to the 'waves' of modern quantum theory.'

Ah, not only can the atomos exist but also ,yes, it does exist . . . at that level. But then quantum of the shell theory states that not only that they exist but that they coexist? Although matter has many forms exist . . . or rather they exist relative to each other? Thing is the atomos theory is at the end of the cutting processing, what do you find: another particle (s)? Not particles but particle-system(s), which form our existence?
Quote:

Relativisticly speaking, inertial mass systems spins around its' center, a non-inertial systems? As long as they spin around the same center point . . . charged inertial particles produces e-m (fields) radiation, [axiom] non-inertial mass => has no inertia therefore no acceleration?

quote:

---

Hmm. . . 'All matter is made up of =>atoms, which in turn are made up of =>elementary particles; it exist ordinarily as a solid, liquid or gases.'
'electron . . . Stable, negatively charged particle; it is a constituent of all atoms, and a member of a class of particles known as =>leptons. '
'The electrons in each atom surrounds the nucleus in groupings called shells; in a neutral atom the number of electrons is equal to the number of protons in the nucleus. ' 'This electron structure is responsible for the chemical properties of the atom (see =>atomic structure).'

---

But then shell theory that each subshell becomes closed as the orbitals are filled; instead of thinking of shells being separated by distance; we should rather relate it as frequency, being the source of the barrier that exist between shells and component, sub shells. So 2p orbitals individually form 3 - 1s orbitals & a 2s orbital to form the 2nd shell . . {note that a P orbital act like an S orbital in that it forms a closed shell when filled}
. . I wonder is more like the 2nd/3rd shells are composed of 4 – 1s orbitals being representative of an inert gas configuration? The 1st orbital configuration generates electro-magnetic fields (waves) extending in all (3- dimensions) directions. The S orbital configuration, electro-magnetically projects a wave, which acts to give stability to S orbital configuration electrons; the P orbital configuration acts likewise, etc. Then wavelength might be the characteristic in the background that establishes the filling order of the orbitals forming the element listed by the Periodic Table.
Therefore in dividing matter, inertial mass decreases to the point where the mass/ charge ratio produces a state where charge tends to increase till it becomes more and more the directing force. Thus we see chemical bonds forming => changing the direction of the spatial orientation of the orbital axis or direction of the bond

quote:

---

'atomic structure

wizardslogic I was once told that matter remains "lifeless" and unformed until the light of consciousness animates it into some conceptualized form or identity. Matter, according my friend's reasoning, has no cognitive identity, no conceptual meaning until consciousness, or rather, mind, gives it that identity or meaning. Which is like saying a cat does not exist until the human mind gives it, 'matter', the "conceptual form" of a cat. I don't know if I completely get that but, well, there it is.
5:55:00 pm - May 23, 20094:49:27 pm - May 23, 2009
"Each conscious mind is alone in the universe!"

---

Ya, we see a dark figure walking through the woods so we call it a bogey man, abominable snow man, etc?

Yea, kind of a stumbling block understand how the building blocks of our reality conform to those presented by science & mathematics . .