The Naked Scientists
Toggle navigation
Login
Register
Podcasts
The Naked Scientists
eLife
Naked Genetics
Naked Astronomy
In short
Naked Neuroscience
Ask! The Naked Scientists
Question of the Week
Archive
Video
SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
Articles
Science News
Features
Interviews
Answers to Science Questions
Get Naked
Donate
Do an Experiment
Science Forum
Ask a Question
About
Meet the team
Our Sponsors
Site Map
Contact us
User menu
Login
Register
Search
Home
Help
Search
Tags
Member Map
Recent Topics
Login
Register
Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side
New Theories
Does modified experiment confirm "disproof of quantum theory"?
« previous
next »
Print
Pages: [
1
]
Go Down
Does modified experiment confirm "disproof of quantum theory"?
0 Replies
3295 Views
0 Tags
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
sciconoclast
(OP)
Sr. Member
149
Activity:
0%
Does modified experiment confirm "disproof of quantum theory"?
«
on:
10/11/2010 01:30:15 »
A new version of experiment.
In an earlier thread, "Disproof of quantum theory, or not", it was suggested that skewed double slits projecting a pattern with double slit spacing in two different planes indicated that convergence of probable paths at the target screen, as required in quantum theory, is not necessary. Even though the light from one slit did not show any visible signs of overlapping with the light from the other slit; the possibility that a faint amount of diffracted light from one slit was causing the double slit interference with the other slit was raised. In this new experiment there are areas shield from light from all but one slit.
Light from a laser is passed through a double slit with the slits each 14 degrees off of vertical in opposite directions. The left slit is 0.50mm and the right slit is 0.60mm and the laser is focused at a spacer width of 3.50mm.
At 3.12m past the double slits two shields are placed to create a 22.00mm gap. The right edge of the left shield is placed 12.30mm to the right of the centerline of the experiment, which positions it in the dark area between the second and third peripheral bans in the patterns. The left edge of the right shield is placed 34.30mm to the right of centerline, which positions it in the dark area between the eight and ninth peripheral bans in the upper, or right slit, pattern and the sixth and seventh peripheral bans of the lower, or left slit, pattern.
With the shield edges positioned in the dark areas there is not any diffraction from the shield edges. If any did occur it would be perpendicular to the vertical shield edges and out of the skewed patterns. If any light was diffracted towards the light from the slits it would create a streak rather than a double slit pattern.
Using the center line of the experiment as a 0.0000 degree zenith the angles to the shield edges are: from the left edge of the left slit, 6.6816 degrees to the left edge of the right shield; from the left edge of the right slit, 5.9559 degrees to the left edge of the right shield; from the right edge of the left slit, 2.5784degrees to right edge of the left shield; and from the right edge of the right slit, 1.8266 degrees to the right edge of the left slit.
This means that at a target screen, 3.79m farther ahead, there is a 4.859mm space to the far right of the bottom, or left slit, pattern void of any light from the right slit. And, a 4.980mm space to the far left of the upper, or right slit, pattern void of any light from the left slit. Each of these spaces is inhabited by a single slit peripheral ban that has been subdivided into smaller double slit spaced bans.
This means that not only is there double slit spacing in different planes perpendicular to each of the two slits but also that there is double slit spacing in areas where only the light from one slit can physically reach.
Sketch of new experiment.
[ Invalid Attachment ]
Defenders of the orthodox, have another go at it.
Logged
Print
Pages: [
1
]
Go Up
« previous
next »
Tags:
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...