[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #60


Thought experiment continued
The spheres of energy expand until expansion is interrupted by intersecting and overlapping with adjacent expanding waves (parent waves).


A depiction of the infinite space, containing the high energy density spots from image 2, that have continued to expanded as time continues to pass. They continue to enlarge, and individually occupy more and more space, and the distance between them has decreased to the point that some spherical energy waves have intersected and have begun to overlap. When overlap occurs, the two or more "parent" waves contribute some of their energy to the overlap space, creating a new high energy density environment within the overlap space.                                                                                                         
 

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #61


Thought experiment continued



In image 3b, I highlighted the overlap spaces where “parent” expanding spherical energy waves overlap and occupy the same space. The energy density in those overlap spaces is higher than the energy density of either parent wave, since each parent has added its energy density to the overlap space.


When two “parent” spheres intersect and overlap, new physics is introduced into the domain of the thought experiment. Up until the expanding spheres of energy intersect, the physics were simple. We had infinite empty space, into which energy has been introduced in the form of infinitely dense points of energy, distributed randomly throughout the otherwise empty space.


There probably isn’t any objection to the assumption of mechanics that cause the infinite points of energy to individually expand into the surrounding empty space. I call that the force of energy density equalization. The premise is that the infinitely dense energy will decline in density as it expands spherically into empty space, and as expansion proceeds, the density will trend toward equal density throughout the volume of the individually expanding spheres. That will change at the point where two or more individually expanding spheres intersect and overlap, as they do in image 3b.


Note that looking at the images, it is clear that as the energy waves continue to expand, there will eventually be no empty space left; all space will contain some level of wave energy density.

Thought experiment to be continued ...

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #62



Thought experiment continued

The velocity of spherical wave energy front expansion in the ISU (Infinite Spongy Universe) model is at the speed of light, which is variable relative to the local wave energy density which varies relative to the energy density of the local background. Further, in the ISU, the presence of particles and objects is necessary for there to by any light and gravity waves traversing the background.

We are in a thought experiment where those conditions have begun to be developed from an infinite empty space, and will evolve to an infinite universe filled with with massive objects that produce varying levels of wave energy, in the form of light and gravitational waves.

The first case of spherical wave energy front expansion we encounter in our thought experiment is where infinitely dense energy in multiple single points across the otherwise infinite empty space begin to equalize with the otherwise empty surrounding space. The velocity of that expansion would be expected to be at nature’s maximum spherical energy wave front velocity.

Don’t get too wrapped up in what that velocity might be though, because the energy density differential that produces wave advance at that velocity only exists in our thought experiment. By the time the conditions in the thought experiment approach the “reality” of the ISU model, energy density differentials will have moderated from those impossible initial levels.

The maximum differential existing in the ISU model is in conjunction with any of the Big Bang events that commonly occur here and there across the landscape of the greater universe, caused by preconditions within a universe that has always existed, much the same as it does today.


Note that when two separately advancing waves encounter each other, there is a time delay effect at the point of intersection, because the velocity of each individual converging wave is slowed at the instant that it encounters an environment where the surrounding energy density increases, as when it encounters another the high energy density wave.

In the ISU, where all space is filled with varying levels of wave energy density, the velocity of light waves and gravity waves becomes variable as meaningful waves traverse the oscillating background, and we are now in the process of describing how that oscillating wave energy background would develop form the conditions in images 1 through 3.

Since light waves and gravitational waves aren’t present yet in our thought experiment, once we describe the development of the oscillations, we will then address the develpment of particles which produce both light and gravitational waves.

So let’s get back to the thought experiment and pick up with image 4a below:


The third wave: Parent wave 1 and parent wave 2 overlap (verb), creating a lens shaped space (the third wave) that has high wave energy density relative to the individual parent waves. The “lens” has the sum of the energy density of the parent waves, for talking purposes.

See image 4b


The third wave is created from the parent waves, and has the combined energy density of the parents. The scenario is that the new third wave will expand into the existing space occupied by the two parent waves. The energy density of the the parent waves will continue to decline as they both continue to expand into the low energy density surrounding them. The energy density of the third waves will also decline as they expand, bringing into play some new variables that will affect the local wave energy density and therefore the local speed of wave front expansion.

Thought experiment to be continued …

 

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #63



Thought experiment continued

Just a note for future reference: Two factors come into play so far in the thought experiment that are not graphically accounted for in images 4a and 4b. One is the impact of the slowing rate of wave front advance when the parent spheres encounter each other, which would tend to flatten the lens, and the other is the effect of energy density equalization on the shape of the lens as the overlap proceeds that would cause the lens to trend toward a more spherical shape. To simplify the images and the discussion, I am using a modification of the “spherical cow” technique to let the strict geometrical overlap be depicted in the images.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_cow
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/gallery/43933_27_07_17_10_09_48.gif

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #64


Newton and Huygens

I want to note on the thread that I made another stop at our local library used book store last week, and picked up a nice book from their used science book shelf. The Life of Isaac Newton, by Richard Westfall, 328 pages, $1.50 . He and Christiaan Huygens were contemporaries, and had numerous communications about their work; particle vs wave nature of light. I mentioned my appreciation of Huygens in reply #19, and the book has a number of interesting references to those communications. Both have influenced my thinking about the nature of the wave-particle, as the ISU model has evolved.

https://www.tf.uni-kiel.de/matwis/amat/admat_en/kap_5/advanced/t5_1_1.html
Newton vs. Huygens

[/t][/t][/t][/t] we learned in High school,  (1643 - 1727), the science hero of the 17th century, propagated the view that light consists of small particles or corpuscles.[/t] He based his book „Opticks or a treatise of the reflections, refractions, inflections and colours of light“ on this point of view, and since he didn't do so badly, it was far from obvious that he should be wrong. For example, he deduced that white light consists of of colored light (corpuscles of different sizes) that get separated in a prism or generally in glass. Prior to his insight, everybody believed that glass somehow changed the light. Based on this he not only explained the nature of a rainbow but also concluded that a telescope based on mirrors should be superior to one with lenses because of their "chromatic aberration" (he did not use this term, of course). He even built a prototype of a mirror based telescope but, bad luck, it wasn't better than the lens telescopes of his times because his mirror suffered from spherical aberration. He knew that his corpuscle model could not (easily) explain some known effects around interference or polarization tied to birefringence (first described in 1669 by ) but so what. There was a lot of other stuff in the 17th century that had not yet been satisfactorily explained. (1629-1695), a Dutch mathematician, physicist and so on, formulated the , nowadays better known as , and generally argued that light consists of waves. Augustin-Jean (1788 – 827), was a French engineer who contributed significantly to the establishment of the theory of wave optics long after Huygens, so from my point if view it is OK to just call it Huygens principle. Huygens experimented with Icelandic crystals (calcite) that showed double refraction (birefringence) and explained it with his wave theory and polarized light. Based on his insights he also constructed and made better lenses and thus microscopes, telescopes and so on. Moreover, he made seminal contributions to mechanics and was instrumental in early probability theory. He fought Newton tooth and nail about the nature of light. He lost the fight. Newton appealed to the "Royal Society", the topmost authority in those bygone times, and 1715 it ruled that Newton's point of view was the correct one. This was not as stupid as it appears now. Huygens, as we know now, was right but could not really prove his assertions then. For that another 75 years needed to pass. Enter  (1773 - 1829). While he started as a physician, he mutated and became a true physicist early in life and proved beyond doubt that light is a wave. Somewhat ironically, it weren't only the seminal  done around 1802 but also the explanation of "" that convinced all and sundry that light is a wave and not a particle. Young did not just establish the wave nature of light but contributed to many other aspects of physics or, as we would call it now, materials science. "", for example, is named after him for good reasons. Moreover, he was also instrumental in deciphering hieroglyphic and other forgotten scripts. So Newton was wrong - or was he? Enter  (1879 - 1955). In 1905, the "annus mirabilis", he postulated the , a kind of light particle, to explain the photo electric effect (that should get him his one Nobel prize in 1921). He also published the special theory of relativity in this year and the explanation of Brownian motion, i.e.. the atomic theory of diffusion. By the way, he received his Ph.D. (Dr. degree) a year later in 1906. So light is now a particle once more? Of course meanwhile we know better. We know since  (1892 - 1987) established in 1924 that particles are also waves, that there is no such thing as a pure wave or a pure particle. There are only "things" described by a wave function that comes out as a solution of the Schrödinger equation (or the more general equations of quantum (field) theory). There are no problems anymore, except that explaining that to somebody not used to quantum theory is like explaining color to the blind, symphonies to the deaf, reason to a lawyer, conservation laws to an economist or truth to a theologian. It's tough. We also know now how we might simplify and approximate the problem at hand by looking at the "thing" either as a pure particle or a pure wave.

[/td][/tr][/table]

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #65



Thought experiment continued






Note the additional description:



In Image 5, the expansion of the high energy spots has continued from the positions in Image 3. Every intersection between the initial parent waves forms a third wave, and every third wave expands until its expansion is interrupted by intersecting with adjacent waves, at which time new third waves are formed. Eventually, all space is filled with expanding third waves. The volume of space that each third wave occupies before it intersects with an adjacent wave is getting smaller because the occurrence of intersections is increasing rapidly.

In the thought experiment, unless something is introduced to stop the increase in the number of third waves across the infinite space, the volume of each new third wave will continue to decrease. The action will be affected by the fact that there is a time delay at each point of intersection, but unless some new physics is introduced, the average volume of each third wave will simply continue to decrease, on the premise that energy within each expanding wave is infinitely fine, and can exist in smaller and smaller increments.

The process will approach but never reach the minimum wave volume limit, which I hypothesize would be where the volume of each new overlap (third wave) approaches a single point of space. We don’t encounter that issue in the ISU because there are particles and massive objects which introduce gravity to oppose the force of energy density equalization. Gravity causes big bangs and big crunches as a result of the process of Big Bang arena action discussed earlier. The perpetual third wave action at this point in the thought experiment is the counterpart to the oscillating wave energy background in the  ISU.

Thought experiment to be continued …

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #66





Thought experiment continued

The perpetual third wave action at this point in the thought experiment is the counterpart to the oscillating wave energy background in the  ISU.

However, there is a problem with the though experiment that needs attention. It would seem that if the progression toward tinier and tinier third waves is left to continue, we would be approaching wave energy density equalization, ultimately down to the point level. Unlimited third wave progression leads toward a state that is completely inert, with no remaining wave action, and no oscillating background wave energy at all. That could perhaps be thought of as the equivalent to the heat death of the universe “outcome” in General Relativity, or to the “end game” in the Big Rip model of cosmology, i.e., total entropy, which is avoided in the ISU by perpetual Big Bang arena action across the infinite landscape.


To rescue the thought experiment, we can introduce some known science, and some generally accepted theoretical physics to address the problem. Up to now there is no mechanism for particles to form by themselves out of perfectly smooth, homogeneous energy that is being disbursed by the natural wave action, no perturbations or inconsistencies to disturb the homogeneity. But we know that particles, light, and gravity exist, and so I introduce those realities into the thought experiment in the following fashion:


1) Each of the initial infinitely dense points of energy that we introduced randomly across the infinite empty space, are replaced by a collapse/bounce phase big crunches as described in the process of Big Bang arena action in the ISU model. The crunches collapse under the compression of gravity.


2) The “collapsing crunches” bounce off of natures maximum allowed wave energy density limit which occurs at the core of each collapsing Big Crunch, at the instant of the bounce. It is those collapsed big crunches, ready to bounce into expansion, that are inserted into the thought experiment in place of the initial infinitely dense points of energy.


3) The “bounce”, coupled with the force of energy density equalization, causes the rapid expansion of the hot dense balls of wave energy. There is a ball of photon energy generated during the collapse/bounce, and that expands spherically at the local speed of light, out into the space occupied by the still expanding “parent” arena waves.


4) Accompanying natures largest bursts of photon energy, is the dense state wave energy that represents the remains of the wave-particles that made up the crunches before they collapsed. The gravitational collapse is referred to as particle “negation”, where the remaining particles in the crunches give up their individual space, and merge into the same space during the collapses.


5) Those “remains” of each big crunch are compressed into a ball of  “dense state” wave energy that decays as energy density equalization takes over from the gravitational collapses. That negated wave energy from pre-existing particles, rapidly decays into exotic particles as expansion progresses; those exotic massive particles are the source of the mass of all subsequent particles that form across each new Big Bang arena.


6) The decay process eventually leads to stable particles that fill the expanding Big Bang arena energy waves.


7) The thought experiment now consists of a landscape of expanding Big Bang arenas that are cooling as they expand, and that are filling with stable particles, which marks the emergence of particles and gravity within the new, expanding arena waves.

8)As the environment in each expanding arena cools sufficiently, they will accommodate the formation of atoms and simple gasses like hydrogen and helium. Particles that form in the expanding arenas will have expansion momentum imparted to them, so they are all moving away from each other as they form.


9) Along with the introduction of gravity comes the inverse square law, which means that gravity is strongest in close quarters. Gravity overcomes expansion momentum in close quarters, and that causes the clumping of the early gasses into numerous huge clouds across the arena, which condense into massive, fast burning mega stars. The massive stars themselves conserve the expansion momentum of their constituent particles, and on a larger scale, expansion momentum out paces gravity, and the galaxies are therefore moving away from each other as the arena expands.


10) Those first round stars burn their fuel quickly and burst into super novas, producing heavy nuclei and clouds of “dust”. That process seeds the condensation of new, smaller, more stable and long lived stars, forming the new galaxies. The individual stars form with planets and moons, which represent hospitable environments where life can be generated.


11) Through an iterative process of trial and error, the chemistry and physics working together randomly produce self replicating molecules, life emerges, evolves, and establishes the presence of self-aware, intelligent life forms that gain footholds throughout each expanding big bang arena. Our thought experiment now features Big Bang arenas action, and life abounds across each arena, and across the infinite Big Bang arena landscape of the greater universe.


12) And here we are today in the Infinite Spongy Universe (ISU).









Thought experiment to be continued …

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #67



Thought experiment continued

Imagining a typical patch of the landscape of the greater universe in our thought experiment, after replacing the infinitely dense points of energy with "ready to expand" collapse/bounce phase big crunches, and giving the resulting universe ample time for Big Bang arena action to play out.

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #68




Thought experiment continued




The quantum: At this point in the thought experiment, the term “quantum”, as it pertains to the processes involving particles, mass, and energy can be explained and discussed. Throughout the thought experiment, energy, particles, quantum increments, arena action and quantum action have been mentioned (not to be confused with the Quantum of Action, aka the Planck Constant; a photon is said to be one quantum of action that can have a range of energy, but the same photon will have numerous quanta of the sort that are found in the ISU process of quantum action). ”quantum vs photon”. So let me refer back to image 4a:



That image can be seen as the intersection and overlap of two quanta. The same image can apply to the internal workings of quantum action within all particles. All particles are wave-particles in the ISU model. Particles can be composed of almost any number of quanta, as long as each particle’s presence is maintained by the process of quantum action.

So what does it mean for the presence of a particle to be maintained by the process of quantum action? I means that there is a complex standing wave pattern that has stability, and that contains a stable number of quanta in a given wave-energy density environment. If the wave-particle moves, or if the local wave energy density environment changes, the number of quanta that the standing wave pattern contains changes.

For example, if you accelerate a standing wave pattern relative to its local space, it gains more quanta as a result of that relative motion. The reason for the increase in quanta is that the standing wave has two components, inflowing gravitational wave energy, and out flowing gravitational wave energy. When a particle is said to be at rest, the directionally inflowing wave energy is equal to the spherically out flowing wave energy. But when a particle moves from one energy density environment to another, as when it is accelerated, the inflowing wave energy component from the direction of motion provides more quanta than the spherically out flowing wave energy component releases.

The simple graphical representation of that process can be seen in this image:



The graphic depicts a particle made up of multiple quantum waves being maintained by inflowing and out flowing wave energy. The larger yellow arrow indicates the direction of the highest wave energy density inflow from other objects in space. Small blue arrows depict the spherical out flowing wave. The red arrow depicts the direction of motion due to the directional imbalance in inflowing wave energy density.


Thought experiment to be continued …

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #69




Thought experiment continued

Elaborating on the nature of wave-particles: please refer again to Image 4a.

Please note that the waves depicted in 4a are “meaningful” waves that traverse the oscillating background, as opposed to oscillations that make up the background. In reply #65, I lamented that without the presence of particles and gravity, nothing would prevent the oscillations from declining in volume, right down to single points of space; the big rip and/or the heat death of the universe, or at least of the inert state of the thought experiment, at that point.


But with the introduction of particles and gravity, that fate has been avoided. The oscillating background will not reach complete energy density equalization because matter and gravity are being distributed throughout the infinite space. With the presence of wave energy, wave-particles, and the forces of gravity and wave energy density equalization, the oscillating background will continue forever, and will be refreshed here and there, now and then, by the occurrence of big bangs and expanding Big Bang arenas.


I mentioned in reply #63, that by the time we get to the “reality” of the ISU, energy density differentials that govern the speed of energy wave fronts advancing through space will have moderated, and the presence of the oscillating background is the moderating factor.


The oscillating background is present everywhere, including within the particle space. With the introduction of particles and gravity, light and gravitational waves are continually emitted by particles and objects that occupy space, and those waves are destined to perpetually traverse the “otherwise waveless” oscillating wave energy background. They are designated as the “meaningful” waves in the ISU model. When I mention that particles are composed of wave energy in quantum increments, I am referring to light waves and gravitational waves as the source of the quantized wave action that is orchestrated by the process of quantum action.


The advance of light and gravity waves is best understood as the result of energy density equalization moderated by the density of the oscillating background.




Thought experiment to be continued ...

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #70



Thought experiment continued

In the ISU, particles are composed of a huge number of wave intersections like the one depicted in Images 4a and 4b, and each wave intersection produces third waves within the particle space. I refer to those wave intersections/overlaps as high energy density spots, each spot representing a quantum of wave energy:

You might want to try to visualize a particle’s standing wave pattern, and imagine meaningful waves approaching it from all directions; refer to one such meaningful wave as depicted in Image 9 in the last post. That image is of a small section of the spherical wave front of a gravitational wave emitted from a distant object.

To investigate a quantum at the micro level where “quantum action” is playing out, it is useful to add a new concept to the thought experiment. I call it the “freeze frame” idea, where we freeze the particle in a precise location in space, and freeze the action that is taking place within the particle’s standing wave pattern. The standing wave pattern represents the particle space, and is the physical presence of the wave-particle. It has a core where the quanta that make up the mass of the particle are gathered. The core portion is the source of the spherical gravitational waves emitted by the particle. The whole particle is best depicted as the high density core containing the quanta, and the spherical out flowing gravitational waves emitted by the core.







While we are in the freeze frame mode, assuming we are equipped with super tools for the investigation, and with heavy reliance on the spherical cow analogy to gloss over the unquantifiable details, you would be able to carry out an investigation. The investigation would involve a look inside the particle space, where we would see an intricate scene of wave intersections, overlaps, and third waves (quantum waves).


With extreme magnification and much patience, we could take an inventory of all of the spherical waves that fill the particle space. The inventory would involve the count of the number of internal expanding waves, measuring their individual volumes, and would thus include a count of the number of high energy density spots within the particle core. That count relates to the mass of the particular particle.


From this data, we calculate the average volume of space occupied by an average quantum of energy. We can ignore the stipulations about the local wave energy density of the particle, and the directional inflow and spherical out flow of wave energy, for now.


If we were armed with the information about the total energy of the particle itself, we could determine the energy value of the quantum in that environment. We equate the net wave energy carried by the waves making up the standing wave pattern, to the total energy of the particle, and divide it by the number of internal quanta; that would give us the energy of the quantum increment, for talking purposes.




Of course, we would have a units of measure issue to solve.


Thought experiment to be continued …

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply 71



Always Existed is as close to the Supernatural as the ISU gets
Anything that appears Supernatural has natural causes that we don't yet understand
ISU Philosophy of Eternal Intent (link to reply #108)
Wave-particle speculation
Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser set-up


We started the thread talking about a single, multiple Big Bang universe landscape, infinite in space, time, and wave energy, and we have come to talking about tiny, meaningful wave intersections that, in huge numbers, are responsible for the mass of a single particle. From infinite to infinitesimal, and all composed of wave energy in varying sized increments, traversing space filled with a foundational wave energy background of the  tiniest waves, who’s action is characterized as perpetual oscillations that connect it all together.


The model, the Infinite Spongy Universe model, has one overriding characteristic that might be beyond the capacity of the mind to fully grasp, without stepping out of the physical reality, and venturing into the philosophical contemplation of an infinite intention behind it all. I refer to the characteristic of having always existed. That is as close to the supernatural as you can get while staying within the bounds of the ISU, and without violating the overriding premise that anything supernatural has natural causes that we don’t yet understand.


For that reason, I assert that my philosophy of the universe has been derived from the physical mechanics of the infinite and eternal wave energy density universe that, not coincidentally hosts, and always has, self-aware intelligent individuals who seem intent upon contemplating the possibility of eternal intent, and for that reason I label the philosophy of the Infinite Spongy Universe model, Eternal Intent (to be discussed in reply #108 https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=70348.msg524158#msg524158).


The wave-particle of the model has the ability to express both its wave nature and its particle nature. Here is where I would like to take that thought, as I continue the thought experiment:


Wave-Particle Speculation:


Speculation: Particles have both a wave nature which is out flowing waves (the wave portion) and a particle nature (the dense core), making them wave-particles. Individual wave-particles can display both their wave and particle nature at that same time in single particle, two slit experiments.


Evidence: In the single particle two slit experiments, there is a wave pattern that forms on the screen after many single particles are sent through the slits.


Explanation: The wave portion of the wave-particle goes through both slits, and the particle portion goes through one or the other. The wave interference pattern is caused as the out flowing wave energy from the particle core passes through both slits. The interference pattern has peaks and valleys of wave energy density which influence the path of the particle between the slits and the detector.


Individual particles fired at a single slit, over time, yield a visual that shows no wave pattern. Individual particles fired at two slits, over time, will yield a familiar visual of a wave interference pattern; like this laser light through two slits that I made myself:



That is the visual evidence of the wave-particle duality which is a characteristic of all particles, and gives rise to the premise that not only particles have this wave-particle duality, but that all objects, ranging from buckyballs to neutron stars have the same duality, with shorter and shorter frequencies as you go from photons to black holes.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser




Setup of the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment of Kim et al. Detector D0 is movable


To be continued …

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #72




Wave-particle duality
Delayed choice quantum eraser

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraserhttps://youtu.be/H6HLjpj4Nt4


We’ll be getting into this experiment in some detail as the thread continues, because when the wave-particle structure hypothesized in the ISU model is applied to the action, the appearance of the interference pattern vs no interference is explained simply by the wave portion of the wave-particle going through both slits, and the particle portion at the core of the wave-particle going through one or the other, but not both slits. The implication is that the wave-particle always displays both its wave nature and its particle nature at the same time, not in superposition until observed.
 The structure, as shown here …


… depicts the wave portion expanding spherically outward from the core portion, and thus able to pass through both slits in advance of the particle passing through one randomly determined slit.


This experiment revolves around several important aspects of quantum mechanics, including entanglement, superposition, the collapse of the wave function, faster than light action, and non-locality. I’ll address the implications that the ISU wave-particle structure has on an ISU Interpretation of quantum mechanics being considered.


If you can accept the idea that the wave-particle is as it is depicted in the ISU, or just want to examine the experiment in detail, then read the Wiki on the Delayed choice quantum eraser experiment, which is the first link above, and watch the YouTube video on the delayed choice quantum erasure experiment which is the second link above. Then come back to read the posts that I plan to follow up with to make the case of my interpretation of QM. 


Note that the aspect of the Delayed Choice Quantum Erasure experiment that is said to be paradoxical is mentioned in the first three paragraphs of the Wiki (please read the following):




Delayed choice quantum eraser

A delayed choice quantum eraser experiment, first performed by Yoon-Ho Kim, R. Yu, S. P. Kulik, Y. H. Shih and Marlan O. Scully,[1] and reported in early 1999, is an elaboration on the quantum eraser experiment that incorporates concepts considered in Wheeler's delayed choice experiment. The experiment was designed to investigate peculiar consequences of the well-known double-slit experiment in quantum mechanics, as well as the consequences of quantum entanglement.


The delayed choice quantum eraser experiment investigates a paradox (my bold). If a photon manifests itself as though it had come by a single path to the detector, then "common sense" (which Wheeler and others challenge) says it must have entered the double-slit device as a particle. If a photon manifests itself as though it had come by two indistinguishable paths, then it must have entered the double-slit device as a wave. If the experimental apparatus is changed while the photon is in mid‑flight, then the photon should reverse its original "decision" as to whether to be a wave or a particle. Wheeler pointed out that when these assumptions are applied to a device of interstellar dimensions, a last-minute decision made on Earth on how to observe a photon could alter a decision made millions or even billions of years ago.


While delayed choice experiments have confirmed the seeming ability of measurements made on photons in the present to alter events occurring in the past, this requires a non-standard view of quantum mechanics. If a photon in flight is interpreted as being in a so-called "superposition of states", i.e. if it is interpreted as something that has the potentiality to manifest as a particle or wave, but during its time in flight is neither, then there is no time paradox. This is the standard view, and recent experiments have supported it.[clarification needed][2][3]

To be continued …

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #73



Wave-particle
Double slit
Delayed choice quantum eraser continued

In the third paragraph of the delay choice quantum erasure link quoted above it says: “If a photon in flight is interpreted as being in a so-called "superposition of states", i.e. if it is interpreted as something that has the potentiality to manifest as a particle or wave, but during its time in flight is neither, then there is no time paradox.”


In the ISU, a particle is a wave-particle, as depicted in the image in the last post, at all times, and therefore, it too can be observed as a wave or a particle depending on the apparatus. However, technically it is never in a “superposition of states” as defined in quantum mechanics; it is both states at all times, not a third combined state, and in the delayed choice quantum erasure experiments, a single particle displays both its particle portion, and its wave portion each time a individual particle is sent through. The ISU wave-particle supports a local reality in place of non-locality. In that regard, I’m with him! (Him being the Albert, the one who calls non-locality “spooky action at a distance” (open to discussion of that topic).


FYI, a link to a Wiki on QM:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_quantum_mechanics


And here is a YouTube video on the delayed choice quantum erasure experiment that does a good job of addressing the weirdness of QM and some of the interpretations, for further discussion:
https://youtu.be/8ORLN_KwAgs


Taking a look at wave-particle duality from 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.
Another look at ISU Thought Experiment Image:



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.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser


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 (open for discussion).


It means that in the delayed choice quantum erasure experiment, there will always be an interference pattern developed on the detector 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 Kim et al setup:





The explanation of the experiment points 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? You would; the wave going through both slits creates an interference pattern, and the core portion of the wave-particle randomly passing through one slit is influenced by the interference that it encounters between the slits and the detection screen.


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.

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #74



Double-slit experiment
Wheeler delayed choice experiment
Einstein proclaims "what nonsense"


You can see that this experiment has significantly different implications, depending on the interpretation of Quantum Mechanics that are invoked. Wheeler’s initial thought experiment, see link below, talked of whether or not light “senses the experimental apparatus in the double-slit experiment it will travel through and adjusts its behavior to fit by assuming the appropriate determinate state for it, or whether light remains in an indeterminate state, neither wave nor particle.”



His reference to photons from distant galaxies being entangled and how an observation from Earth could require the decision as to whether it expresses its particle or wave nature to be made retroactively, unless you view the two states to be in superposition until observed. It makes the case for entanglement and superposition, as discussed in the various interpretations used, and conclusions made.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler%27s_delayed_choice_experiment


Wiki quote:
Experimental details
Edit
John Wheeler's original discussion of the possibility of a delayed choice quantum appeared in an essay entitled "Law Without Law," which was published in a book he and Wojciech Hubert Zurek edited called Quantum Theory and Measurement, pp 182–213. He introduced his remarks by reprising the argument between Albert Einstein, who wanted a comprehensible reality, and Niels Bohr, who thought that Einstein's concept of reality was too restricted. Wheeler indicates that Einstein and Bohr explored the consequences of the laboratory experiment that will be discussed below, one in which light can find its way from one corner of a rectangular array of semi-silvered and fully silvered mirrors to the other corner, and then can be made to reveal itself not only as having gone half way around the perimeter by a single path and then exited, but also as having gone both ways around the perimeter and then to have "made a choice" as to whether to exit by one port or the other. Not only does this result hold for beams of light, but also for single photons of light.

Wheeler remarked:

The experiment in the form an interferometer, discussed by Einstein and Bohr, could theoretically be used to investigate whether a photon sometimes sets off along a single path, always follows two paths but sometimes only makes use of one, or whether something else would turn up. However, it was easier to say, "We will, during random runs of the experiment, insert the second half-silvered mirror just before the photon is timed to get there," than it was to figure out a way to make such a rapid substitution. The speed of light is just too fast to permit a mechanical device to do this job, at least within the confines of a laboratory. Much ingenuity was needed to get around this problem.

After several supporting experiments were published, Jacques et al. claimed that an experiment of theirs follows fully the original scheme proposed by Wheeler.[15][16] Their complicated experiment is based on the Mach-Zender interferometer, involving a triggered diamond N-V colour centre photon generator, polarization, and an electro-optical modulator acting as a switchable beam splitter. Measuring in a closed configuration showed interference, while measuring in an open configuration allowed the path of the particle to be determined, which made interference impossible.

In such experiments, Einstein originally argued, it is unreasonable for a single photon to travel simultaneously two routes. Remove the half-silvered mirror at the [upper right], and one will find that the one counter goes off, or the other. Thus the photon has traveled only one route. It travels only one route. but it travels both routes: it travels both routes, but it travels only one route. What nonsense! How obvious it is that quantum theory is inconsistent!”


Conclusions
Edit


Ma, Zeilinger, et al. have summarized what can be known as a result of experiments that have arisen from Wheeler's proposals. They say:

Any explanation of what goes on in a specific individual observation of one photon has to take into account the whole experimental apparatus of the complete quantum state consisting of both photons, and it can only make sense after all information concerning complementary variables has been recorded. Our results demonstrate that the viewpoint that the system photon behaves either definitely as a wave or definitely as a particle would require faster-than-light communication. Because this would be in strong tension with the special theory of relativity, we believe that such a viewpoint should be given up entirely.[25]



End of Wiki quote.



Note that the spherical structure of an ISU wave-particle, regardless of the direction of relative motion, has the spherical out flowing “gravitational” wave energy portion always in advance of the high energy density core portion. That key feature of the structure allows the wave to pass through both slits in advance of the core portion, and interfere with itself.



The conclusion can now be drawn that the entanglement and superposition of the wave and particle states creating a third “combined” state, is not necessary to explain the formation of the wave interference pattern in the unique set up where individual particles are sent through the apparatus. Nor is it necessary to conclude that the “delayed choice” feature of the apparatus in any way causes an action at a distance, or needs to cause a choice of any kind on the part of the wave-particle.

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #75



ISU supports local reality
Around the world quantum clocks and quantum gravity
High energy density spots
Inflowing and outflowing gravitational wave energy components

Let’s move on to the ISU idea of a solution for quantum gravity:


We have reached the point where the ISU wave-particle description has been developed and applied to the delayed choice quantum erasure experiments, and the model supports local reality as an alternative to superposition. Now comes the part about quantum gravity, which offers the ISU explanation for the observed around-the-world atomic clock experiments:


http://science.sciencemag.org/content/177/4044/166 Predicted


Abstract
During October 1971, four cesium beam atomic clocks were flown on regularly scheduled commercial jet flights around the world twice, once eastward and once westward, to test Einstein's theory of relativity with macroscopic clocks. From the actual flight paths of each trip, the theory predicts that the flying clocks, compared with reference clocks at the U.S. Naval Observatory, should have lost 40 ± 23 nanoseconds during the eastward trip, and should have gained 275 ± 21 nanoseconds during the westward trip. The observed time differences are presented in the report that follows this one.


http://science.sciencemag.org/content/177/4044/168 Observed


Abstract
Four cesium beam clocks flown around the world on commercial jet flights during October 1971, once eastward and once westward, recorded directionally dependent time differences which are in good agreement with predictions of conventional relativity theory. Relative to the atomic time scale of the U.S. Naval Observatory, the flying clocks lost 59 ± 10 nanoseconds during the eastward trip and gained 273 ± 7 nanoseconds during the westward trip, where the errors are the corresponding standard deviations. These results provide an unambiguous empirical resolution of the famous clock "paradox" with macroscopic clocks.


Her is a Wiki:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2%80%93Keating_experiment


Note: This clock issue also comes with a reminder of my earlier remark that the ISU is not a spacetime model, even though the Einstein Field Equations work very nicely to quantify the effect of gravity, and even though the ISU model includes a similar phenomenon to Wheeler’s spacetime foam, linked in reply #57. It is just that the spacetime concept as a whole doesn’t completely fit the grand scale of a steady state, multiple Big Bang arena landscape. However, spacetime curvature does equate nicely to the ISU concept of wave energy density, and wave energy density is the ISU counterpart to the curvature of spacetime within the individual expanding Big Bang arenas of the multiple Big Bang landscape of the greater universe.


Quantum Gravity: The wave-particle image that was applied in the delayed choice experiments to hypothesize that superposition of the wave and particle states wasn't a necessary condition to explain the experimental results, is also the basis of the following images that I want to use to describe the ISU version of quantum gravity.


The wave-particle structure that we examined using the freeze frame concept in reply #71 established the premise that a standing wave particle is composed of wave energy convergences within a standing wave pattern. Each convergence exists only momentarily as the inflowing and out flowing wave energy components of the standing wave pattern play out in the particle’s space. They form and disburse and reform as governed by the process of quantum action within and around the particle-space (standing wave pattern). In this image, the shaded sphere in the center is one momentary high energy density spot among the perhaps hundreds of millions, or billions of such spots depicted in the following wave-particle images as the “high density" spots:



The following images take a first look at the ISU solution to quantum gravity and will be the topic of the following posts to tie in wave-particles, atomic clock experimental results, and quantum gravity.






To be continued …

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #76



Atomic clocks
The rate that clocks measure the of time
Gravitational wave energy density differentials
Added quanta = increased mass

In the ISU, the rate that clocks measure the passing of time is governed by the local gravitational wave energy density environment of the clock, which is thought to have a causal relationship to time dilation in Relativity. Two atomic clocks at rest in the same local environment will measure time to be passing at the same rate. If one clock moves relative to the rest position, the rate that the moving clock measures the passing of time will be slower than the rate that the rest clock measures the passing of time, just like in General Relativity. Though the effect is the same in the ISU, the ISU explanation uses physical mechanics of how acceleration increases the gravitational wave energy density of the local environment of the moving clock. This is the same effect mentioned in regard to an increase in the number of quanta within an accelerated particle or object, mentioned in reply #69, and to which Image 9 of the thought experiment applies.


The premise is that the added number of quanta increases the mass of the particle, and that increases the wave energy density within the particle space, and consequently slows the process of quantum action that is taking place within the particle’s standing wave pattern. The accelerated, more massive particle is said to function slower relative to a rest particle.


How does that relate to the difference in the time that is recorded to have passed between an atomic clock onboard a westward traveling plane, vs the amount of time recorded to have passed by an identical atomic clock on an eastward traveling plane, when both are compared the the amount of time that has passed on a clock at a stationary location on the surface of the earth?


Physically, relative to the sun and moon, the surface of the earth travels west to east. A stationary clock on the ground is also moving west to east, which slows the clock by the same rate, whether the clock on the plane is traveling westward or eastward; the stationary clock runs slow relative to a rest position.


A moving clock on a plane, traveling westward, is traveling into the setting sun and moon, which speeds up the clock when compared to a moving clock on a plane, traveling eastward into the rising sun and moon.


The relative motion of the eastward traveling clock causes it to encounter higher gravitational wave energy density as it travels into the outflowing gravitational wave energy component of the sun and moon, and thus the eastward traveling clock slows down relative to the westward traveling clock. The relative motion of the westward traveling clock traveling away from the rising sun and moon, i.e., into the setting sun and moon, has the opposite effect, and that clock runs faster, relative to the eastward bound clock, because, by comparison, it is operating in a lower wave energy density environment than the eastward bound clock.


Thus the ISU, a quantum gravitational wave energy density model, has a mechanical explanation for the clock speed phenomena, i.e., the gravitational wave energy density emitted into surrounding space by massive objects affects the quantum composition of an accelerated particle or object. Granted it is a conclusion based on the net effect of the concept where there are various massive bodies in relative motion in the local vicinity of space.


The effects of the relative airplane motion are tiny, but at relativistic velocities the affect on the density of the particles making up the clock are remarkable as depicted in this relativistic image:

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #77


Comparing GR curvature and ISU gravitational wave energy density
Wave energy density profile of space
Particle drawing depicting quantum gravity


General Relativity spacetime promotes the following:
Matter tells space how to curve.
Curved space tells matter how to move.
Everything moves in the straightest possible line in space-time.


ISU gravity wave mechanics support the following:
Matter emits gravitational waves.
Gravitational waves tell matter how to move.
Everything moves in curved paths as the gravitational wave energy density profile in space constantly changes.


Edit 6/28/2018 re. Reply #319:
General Relativity spacetime promotes the following:
Matter tells space how to curve.
Curved space tells matter how to move.
Everything moves in the straightest possible line in space-time.


ISU gravity wave mechanics support the following:
Matter emits gravitational waves into the wave energy density profile of space.
The Gravitational Wave Energy Density Profile of Space tells matter how to move.
Everything moves in curved paths as the gravitational wave energy density profile in space constantly changes.
[End of edit]

I used the following image earlier to depict a standing wave particle, but it also serves as a descriptive image in regard to quantum gravity:
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/gallery/43933_26_07_17_2_22_44.jpeg


This is called a four quanta particle for the simplicity it offers. There are small, yellow, inward pointing arrows, and one large, yellow, inward pointing arrow. They represent the inflowing gravitational wave energy density emitted from objects in the surrounding space. The large yellow arrow represents the net highest directional inflow of the gravitational wave energy component of the particle’s standing wave pattern.


The four quanta are grouped in the center, within the black circle which represents the boundary of the core portion of the wave-particle. (In reality, a single core portion of a stable wave-particle will be composed of millions or billions of the high energy density spots that momentarily form and disburse within the particle space.)


Outside and overlapping with the core boundary are four green spheres accompanied by blue arrows. The spheres represent the spherically out flowing wave energy from each quanta, and the blue arrows represent the combined spherically out flowing wave energy component from the wave-particle.


All of the black swirls surrounding the wave particle represent the wave energy density of the local space, i.e., the local remnants of spherical gravitational waves emitted by other particles and objects in surrounding space.


The red arrow represents the direction of motion of the wave particle as it refreshes the contained wave energy within the standing wave pattern to balance for the spherically out flowing wave energy component. The big yellow arrow tells us the direction from which the standing quanta will get most of the energy to refresh their presence, because that is the direction of the highest amount of readily available inflowing gravitational wave energy. Thus the wave-particle moves in that direction.


That is quantum gravity in the ISU model.


The ISU is not a spacetime model, it is a gravitational wave energy density model, where instead of  the presence of matter curving spacetime, the presence of matter increases the local wave energy density by emitting gravitational waves into space that travel spherically at the speed of light and gravity away from the emitting object. The gravitational “field” is composed of that out flowing wave energy component of all particles and objects in space.


The local space has a gravitational wave energy profile laid down by all of the matter in surrounding space, and it is that local profile that governs the path that objects take through space as the the process of quantum action takes place.

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #78



Sphere/sphere overlap
ISU Quantum Equation

I view my speculations as quite simple, mathematically. My view is that at the heart of it, we have spherical energy waves expanding all over the place, they intersect and overlap, the energy in the overlap becomes sufficient to equal a new quantum in the local environment, the overlap becomes an expanding quantum wave of energy that goes on to intersect and overlap. (I like to say "spherically" in the spirit of the famous story of the "spherical cow" ).


Here is an image and an accompanying simple equation for calculating the point in the sphere/sphere overlap when a new spherical quantum wave emerges out of the convergences of two “parent” quanta:


https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/gallery/43933_25_07_17_11_19_32.jpeg

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #79





Wagner (wild arse guess not easily refuted)
Wagner on how many ISU quanta in proton and electron at rest





From what we know about the proton in collisions:




… they display amazing detail at high energies. They are often described at rest though, for discussion purposes, and so the proton and the electron in this post are at rest. From what I hypothesize about the process of quantum action, we can derive a ball park figure (Wagner=wild arse guess not easily refuted) of the number of quanta within the proton  and electron at rest.

Divide the energy of a proton at rest by the number of quanta in the proton, and you derive the energy value of one quantum within the standing wave pattern that represents the "at rest" presence of the particle in my model.

The speculation includes that there is a quantum of energy in each high energy density spot within the particle space of a wave-particle, and all of the particle space is filled with quanta. The premise discussed is that the wave-particle (all particles are wave-particles in the model) is composed of energy in quantum increments.

We estimate the number of quanta contained in a proton at rest, and then, given the defined energy of a proton at rest in some standard unit, an estimate of the energy of a quantum in the model that equates to the quanta making up the contained energy of a proton could be derived.

I am using the ratio of the rest energy of an electron vs. a proton, which is 1/1836, to equate the number of quanta in the proton to the number of quanta in the electron, which gives me a basis for a calculation.

In addition, I am supposing that the number of quanta in an electron is equal to the number of quanta at the surface of the proton, based on some logic about the interactions between electrons and protons in an atom. For this exercise it serves as a mathematical relationship between the energy of the proton and the electron, to allow us to do the calculations.

Area/Volume = (4 pi r^2)/(4/3 pi r^3) = 3/r = 1/1836, given the assumption above.

Therefore r=3*1836 = 5508, thus the radius of the proton is equal to 5508 quanta across that diameter within the standing wave pattern of the proton wave-particle.

4 pi r^2 = surface area of a sphere
4/3 pi r^3 = volume of a sphere
pi = 3.14159265

Quanta in an electron = 381,239,356
Quanta in a proton = 699,955,457,517

Those serve is useable numbers for talking purposes in my model.