Taking a look at wave-particle duality form the alternative view that the wave-particle is both a wave and a particle at the same time, not the two traits in superposition. In this speculation, photons and other particles are described as wave-particles that can display both their wave and their particle nature at the same time. Yikes, I know. I am characterizing the photon wave-particle to have the particle portion (dense wave energy core) at the center of the particle space, surrounded by the wave portion which is a spherically out flow of wave energy form the dense core. This particle structure applies to particles that cause a wave interference pattern in single particle two slit experiments, including the delayed choice quantum erasure experiments like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experiment_of_Kim_et_al._.282000.29 This particular particle structure, if the speculation is true, makes understanding what is going on in the single particle two slit experiment a simple matter of the wave portion going through both slits, and interfering with the path of the core portion which goes through one or the other of the two slits. Some may think I am talking pilot wave theory, but I'm not and may differentiate between the two later. It also demystifies the delayed choice quantum erasure experiment, because it means that there will always be an interference pattern developed after multiple single particles are sent through, if there is a path to that detector from both slits, as is the case with D1 and D2 in this image of the setup: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kim_EtAl_Quantum_Eraser.svg The article pointed out the there is always an interference pattern at D1 and D2, but never at D3 and D4. Isn't the reason for that simple, if the photon is a wave-particle, i.e., a wave and a particle at the same time, as I speculate? Here's the Kim et al team comment: If an idler photon is recorded at detector D3, it can only have come from slit B. If an idler photon is recorded at detector D4, it can only have come from slit A. If an idler photon is detected at detector D1 or D2, it might have come from slit A or slit B. Wouldn't you always get an interference pattern on the screen if the particle portion of the wave-particle went through either A or B, but the wave portion of the wave particle went through both A and B, creating the interference? In the Kim et al. setup, that is exactly what the red and the blue paths show; if you have a red and blue path to the detector, you get interference on the screen pattern because you have wave energy reaching both D1 and D2 from each slit. You get no interference on D3 and D4 because those detectors never get wave energy from both slits, they always only get the wave energy that comes through the same slit as the particle comes through. The wave-particle is both a wave and a particle at the same time, and that explains how a single particle two slit experiment can produce the wave interference pattern on the detector screen.
We know what the screens tell us, and if you evaluate what we are told by the experiment form the perspective of a speculative wave-particle that is both wave and particle at the same time, the message is clear and simple as I suggested. There is one more question about the Kim et al article, and it is in regard to the pattern registered at D0: The setup of the experiment delays the point that the path to the detectors is determined until after the photon or electron passes through the two slits. They imply that something strange is going on because the pattern that appears on D0 is sometimes an interference pattern and sometimes not. The erasure of "which path" information comes into play. The article implies that the particle has some sense of what is ahead, and so won't register the interference unless the path information is erased. They're asking, does the photon registering at D0 know which path its twin will take or not? They note that the particles pass through the slits before the path to the detectors is set, so the path the twin takes isn't determined until after the Glan-Thompson prism spits each photon into two paths. The pattern that forms at D0 always correlates with the screen pattern of the twin, regardless of which screen the twin hits. So if the twin hits D1 or D2 which always results in an interference pattern on those screens, there will always be an interference pattern at D0, but if the twin hits D3 or D4 which never causes an interference pattern, there will never be an interference pattern at D0. Does this imply some knowledge on the part of the photon? Maybe, if you think of the photon as being either a wave or a particle but not both in the same experiment. My conclusion is that the photon certainly never knows where its twin will end up, and therefore never knows whether to form an interference pattern at D0 or not. But is actuality, there is no choice to be made. If you consider the speculation that a photon or electron is a wave-particle, i.e., to be both a wave and a particle at the same time, you can always predict the results. There will be an interference pattern formed if there is both a blue path and a red path to the detector; see the diagram: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kim_EtAl_Quantum_Eraser.svg
Because the interference pattern forms in the single particle two slit experiments, there is no debunking that the wave-particle can display that it is in both a wave and a particle state at the same time, in the same single particle experiment, as opposed to being the two traits in superposition. The evidence is adequate to convince many professionals that the two states exist individually at all times. Generally, professionals that support the Pilot Wave interpretation agree that the wave and the particle are both real and present as the wave-particle transits the apparatus of the single particle experiments. The wave portion of the wave-particle can go through both slits and set up an interference pattern in advance, so that when the particle portion, following behind its own wave front, passes through one or the other of the slits, its path is influenced by the peaks and valleys in the interference pattern. This causes the point where it hits the screen to be indeterminate in regard to the exact point of detection, but clearly determinate in the regard that certain parts of the screen are almost entirely excluded due to the interference peaks that direct the particle portion into the valleys
Hi QW . . . . . I haven't (yet) read the remainder of your proposition, but this in your initial post caught my eye. Re: your "dense wave energy core" . . . . . of what is this 'core' comprised? . . . energy? If so, how would the particle aspect differ from the wave aspect (energy).
Note: I was unable to view your profile to see what information might be there. Did you lock it intentionally? Here is a brief explanation of the wave-particle structure for you to look at: I speculate that everything is composed of wave energy, and particles are composed of wave energy in quantum increments, i.e., convergences of waves intersecting and overlapping within the particle space. There is a background of wave energy that I think of as a foundational oscillation in all space, consisting of the tiniest pinhole waves that form at the convergence of every light and gravitational wave as they traverse space. It is the formational background composed of those pinhole waves that come into play in the advance of light and gravitonal waves. The tiny pinhole waves are everywhere, and as a more meaningful light or gravitational wave enters the local background, the spherical oscillations advance the presence of the meaningful wave through the background. You can compare that, to the QFT stated goal of showing everything is fields (force fields and matter fields), and see I have come to the conclusion that the wave-particle is a union of force fields and matter fields. I describe a quantum action process that establishes the presence of wave-particles and governs their interactions, all orchestrated by a quantum action process. The wave particle is all wave energy, some high density in the core at the center of the wave-particle, and some in the form of the outflowing wave energy surrounding the core portion. That is consistent with the concept that particles and objects have inflowing and out flowing wave energy components, i.e., are standing wave patterns when at rest, and that move in the direction of the net highest inflowing wave energy source (a quantum gravity idea). Some of this is quite an alternative view, and I try to convey it in word pictures about visualizations of the quantum action process. I describe matter quanta that make up the wave particle core portion as momentary high density "spots" within the particle space, and a field phenomenon of how the wave portion is emitted by the high density convergences of wave energy within the particle space. The contained energy of the core portion is largely made up of numerous of those internal high density convergences at any instant; the convergences feature a small time delay as the energy from two or more converging parent wave fronts equalizes itself within the overlap space. Each convergence then produces a new expanding out flowing wave (still within the core), and then goes on to form more convergences (quantum action within the particle space is strikingly similar to Big Bang arena action in the landscape of the multiple Big Bang greater universe mentioned earlier). The frequency of the wave-particle's outflowing wave energy is determined by the number of quanta in the core (as if you could do a freeze-frame and count them, lol).
Don't know why Profile is locked . . . . I did not post much there, perhaps? Thanks for your timely and informative response. Will re-read and cogitate over it ASAP! Perhaps this high-density cores could represent quantum fluctuations - some are minor (commonly ongoing) and others are more spectacular (trigger major events). Aside: "I think I may know more about this than I realize!" - N. L. Bowen. BTW: We may know each other - from a former life! HAHA! KSM
I think there is a setting that has to do with whether we can send private messages to each other, not that we would :shrug: If you want to investigage the settings, click on your name and then your profile page. On the profile page, click on preferences, and see a list. On the list there is one that asks if you want if you want to show your online status, and one that asks if you want to show your current activity. Check those two and let's see if that opens up the private messaging feature between us. If not, then go back and uncheck them, and I'll research it a little. I do want to know about those past lives, lol.
