My theory about the double slit experiment

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by bennettoppel, Feb 13, 2015.

  1. bennettoppel Registered Member

    Messages:
    1
    Greetings all

    My idea is that a particle has a spherical shape and a cubic shape.

    The particles cubic shape allows its information to tessalate throughout space. Take a perfect
    white square for example. The white square will create a pattern of white squares that
    fill all of a 2 dimensional plane. If we change the square to black then it creates a pattern
    of black squares that fill a 2-dimensional plane. There is however an origin white or
    black square that creates the pattern. The way the origin square moves through this tesselating
    field is based on probabilties. It simply has a greater chance of moving to squares that
    are nearer to it. Its momentum merely increases the probability that it will continue to move
    in the same direction. Its momentum though is imprecise because its motion it based
    on probabilities.

    When the particle has a spherical shape it has a definate position and momentum because
    spheres do not tesselate. In order to interact with another particle the particle must change its
    shape to spherical. When a particle has a spherical shape the path that it takes is simply
    the path of least resistance.

    When the particle is fired through one slit it initially has a cubic shape and takes the most probabalistic
    route to the plate behind the slits. When it meets the plates though in order to interact with particles
    that make up the plate it then has to change its shape to spherical giving a point of interaction
    with the plate.

    When their are two slits the particle again has a cubic shape which tesselates and creates a cubic field that
    passes through both slits. The cubic field creates two possible probablistic pathways through the slits. The
    multiple potential pathways therefore create the interference pattern which manifests when the particle
    has to again change its shape to spherical to interact with the plate at the back. Because there are two
    equally probablistic pathways the particle on average takes both.

    When their is a measuring device placed between the slits and the backplate the particle has to change its shape
    to spherical in order to interact with them thus causing the collapse of its square field and the resulting pattern
    that follows.

    Thoughts and opinions?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    Do you happen to know a member here named theorist-constant12345? Just curious...
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Boris2 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,106
    maybe it is because it is 6am that the post made no sense to me.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    It is the afternoon here and it made no sense to me.
     
  8. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543

    I've just got over being as pissed as a parrot after a 55th old boys reunion, and it makes even less sense to me!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. Layman Totally Internally Reflected Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,001
    I liked my idea about the particles being able to interact with each other through time at a distance due to the Special Theory of Relativity a lot better that really makes even less sense than this, because relativity and quantum theory have never been properly combined into a single theory.

    Particles that can behave the same way in the double split experiment are thought to be truly point like, like the photon. Then bosons wouldn't be able to be described to act differently based on different shapes, because they wouldn't be able to have one, being point like.
     
  10. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    So you think you've described the quantum experiment, interpreted the results of the double slit experiment? There's many interpretations that do that. You should be able to mathematically determine whether your interpretation recovers the quantum theory. For example review John Cramers 'Transactional Interpretion' of quantum mechanics.
     
  11. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,951
    I'm with brucep on this one. As ridiculous as it might sound, you can't really analyze the double slit experiment properly without renormalization, and that requires (literally) evaluating the contribution of line integrals around each of the moons of Jupiter, Saturn and every other gas giant planet in the universe as part of the process to determine where the maxima and minima of the double slit experiment will (likely) fall. I'm not making any of this up. This is what Richard Feynmann told us. It's either that, or use string theory's amplitudihedron.

    Why only spherical and cubical? Don't you like tetrahedrons or dodecahedrons?
     
  12. jcc Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    412
    A particle, should be either at rest or at speed v without extra force apply on it.

    If it is moving, it moves along straight line. If it hits something, it may pass through/halfway, reflect or deflect. It will lose momentum/speed anyways.

    Does any light or EM wave ever slowdown?

    If light is particle, how a particle hits mirror and reflect back? What bounces it back? The electron? The nucleus? The empty space within silver atoms?

    Science has never been absolute, what makes you think today's science is all correct? In fact, science is so fucked up. Present theories of atomic structure, gravity and light are all wrong.
    Find answers at http://www.thenakedscientists.com/

    Moderator note: link edited.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 27, 2015
  13. Kristoffer Giant Hyrax Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,364
    Why can't I report jcc's spam?
     
  14. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    What? You mean there's no "report" button visible on his post?
     
  15. jcc Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    412
    you may try to explain the experiment by assuming light is gravity wave.
     
  16. zgmc Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    831
    LOL.
     
  17. Kristoffer Giant Hyrax Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,364
    The report button works fine on most occasions, but I have had certain posts I wanted to report that for some reason wouldn't let me. I'd write out my reason for reporting, click the button and... Nothing happens. No clue why.

    Button is there btw, it just doesn't let me finalize the report.
     
  18. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    Maybe it's a browser problem or something. Which browser are you using (and on what platform)?
     
  19. Kristoffer Giant Hyrax Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,364
    Was using my PS4 at the time (lazy and didn't feel like jumping on my pc). That may be the issue now that I think about it.
     
  20. jcc Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    412
    particle has mass, charge, position. either at rest or at move.

    wave is force moving through medium, has no charge, no mass, never at rest.

    light is not wave nor particle but gravitational wave. when light passes the first slit, gravitational pause/wave expend into the 2 slits behind, therefore interaction.
     
  21. Dr_Toad It's green! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,527
    Please stop posting nonsense in the Physics & Math forum.
     
  22. jcc Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    412
    please debunk nonsense if you able to.
     
  23. Dr_Toad It's green! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,527
    It isn't up to me to debunk your nonsense: It's up to you to present it in a manner that your readers can follow, using standards of logic and exposition.

    Not deranged babbling, which is all you've presented so far.
     

Share This Page