[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Physics is not wrong.

PHYSICS IS FRAUD.

Is your model part of physics?
Or do you call it something else?

We can probably save a lot of time by ignoring Mitko.
What he says makes no sense.

At least we can help him (and others) to identify his mistake.

[Bored chemist]

At least we can help him (and others) to identify his mistake.

He doesn't listen.

[alancalverd]

So, it's all normal until it deviates from your model.

I haven't used a model. "Normally dispersive" applies to most media at low photon energies, where wave models describe the interaction satisfactorily. Wave equations describe x-ray diffraction in exactly the same way as for visible photons, but the gross phenomenon analogous to refraction invokes momentum transfer and it all comes out differently.   

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

I haven't used a model.

Yes, you have. You just don't realized it. Maxwell's equations are mathematical model. They don't always have physical analogy.

"Normally dispersive" applies to most media at low photon energies, where wave models describe the interaction satisfactorily. Wave equations describe x-ray diffraction in exactly the same way as for visible photons, but the gross phenomenon analogous to refraction invokes momentum transfer and it all comes out differently.   

What makes the difference? How can it be explained using Fermat's principle?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

You can try to explain my experimental results using your currently embraced model.

I did so, about a year ago.

Can you give the link?
Or perhaps give us the summary of your explanation?
Did you use Huygen's principle?
Can you explain half interference pattern that I got when the single slit consist of a normal edge and a non-diffractive edge?

Just in case you missed to read my post here.

[Bored chemist]

Can you explain half interference pattern that I got when the single slit consist of a normal edge and a non-diffractive edge?

What do you think "non diffractive edge means"?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Can you explain half interference pattern that I got when the single slit consist of a normal edge and a non-diffractive edge?

What do you think "non diffractive edge means"?

The edge which doesn't cause light beam to propagate behind the opaque obstacle.

[Bored chemist]

Can you explain half interference pattern that I got when the single slit consist of a normal edge and a non-diffractive edge?

What do you think "non diffractive edge means"?

The edge which doesn't cause light beam to propagate behind the opaque obstacle.

But any illuminated edge diffracts.

[DarkKnight]

This thread is a follow up of my previous thread discussing and criticizing existing theories about light.
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=68595.0

Here I'll try to figure out if there is a way to improve it. If there is, what will it look like?

I just become aware that a similar topic has been created by CrazyScientist.
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=82373.0
What Is The Nature Of Photons & EM Radiation?

He has his own reasoning to come to his conclusion, which has some differences and similarities than my current understanding of this matter. If I have something to say about his reasoning, I'll post it there. But to avoid complication, I'll post my own reasoning here.

To avoid getting unexpected results, I'll try to avoid making false assumptions, especially the hidden ones, which are likely hard to identify. Any assumptions put into the model should be stated explicitly, along with the reasons why they can't be dismissed. This can significantly slow down the process, but I guess it worths the efforts to resolve spookiness in science.

I recently discussed this topic with another scientist who was writing a paper on this topic . In his paper he explained the transfer of heat via a new term , a Thermo-particle. In discussion I suggested he added the term Thermo-Ghost-Particle.
I think this would explain a Photon quite well.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

But any illuminated edge diffracts.

Not necessarily. I've shown non-diffractive edge in experiments using total internal reflection in visible light. I 've also shown using a metal plate and microwave.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

I recently discussed this topic with another scientist who was writing a paper on this topic . In his paper he explained the transfer of heat via a new term , a Thermo-particle. In discussion I suggested he added the term Thermo-Ghost-Particle.
I think this would explain a Photon quite well.

How can a ghost explain anything? Doesn't that mystify things, which is contrary to the goal of scientific researches?

Can you ask them to answer my previous questions?

Can you explain half interference pattern that I got when the single slit consist of a normal edge and a non-diffractive edge?

What causes the diffracted light in a vertically tilted single edge diffraction to produce curved pattern?

[DarkKnight]

How can a ghost explain anything? Doesn't that mystify things, which is contrary to the goal of scientific researches?

Fictionally , a ghost  can pass through solid objects such as glass or a wall . Defining a particle in being a ghost particle , simply allows a student to instantly understand the nature of the particle by comparison  . I don't think the use brings any mystic stuff to physics,it's not as bad as virtual particles. 

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

How can a ghost explain anything? Doesn't that mystify things, which is contrary to the goal of scientific researches?

Fictionally , a ghost  can pass through solid objects such as glass or a wall . Defining a particle in being a ghost particle , simply allows a student to instantly understand the nature of the particle by comparison  . I don't think the use brings any mystic stuff to physics,it's not as bad as virtual particles. 

What's the advantage of using this thermo-ghost-particle model to explain light, compared to existing models?
How does it explain light frequency, wavelength, and polarization?

[Bored chemist]

I don't think the use brings any mystic stuff to physics,

Then you are wrong because ghosts are inherently mystical.

[Bored chemist]

. I've shown non-diffractive edge in experiments using total internal reflection in visible light. I 've also shown using a metal plate and microwave.

Can you post a link?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

But any illuminated edge diffracts.

Not necessarily. I've shown non-diffractive edge in experiments using total internal reflection in visible light. I 've also shown using a metal plate and microwave.

From my experience, diffraction requires partial opacity/transparency. Perfectly opaque objects, as well as perfectly transparent objects don't produce observable diffraction.

In visible light range of frequency, metals are partially transparent. This video from 4:20 time stamp shows this clearly.

Most published experiments involving diffraction of light, including double slit experiments often ignore this.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

. I've shown non-diffractive edge in experiments using total internal reflection in visible light. I 've also shown using a metal plate and microwave.

Can you post a link?

video #4 Non-diffractive Obstacle

video #9 Horizontally tilted diffraction

video #10 Vertically tilted diffraction

video #11 Non-parallel light source

video #12 Non-diffractive interference

video #13 Non-diffractive slit

Here's my newest video investigating diffraction of light by producing single side interference pattern.

I have uploaded new video showing diffraction in microwave frequency.

Basically, the experiment result leads us to conclude that diffraction comes from the material blocking the microwave path. When the obstruction is opaque enough, we find no diffraction. It's similar to my experiment using laser showing non-diffractive obstruction.

This result is not widely known yet.
 

Here is a new video demonstrating diffraction of microwave using multilayer metal grating, which is a meta-material.

Same as diffraction by normal material, it only occurs when the meta-material is adequately transparent to the microwave.

[Bored chemist]

26 seconds into the first video you say that diffraction by a single edge can not be explained.

In fact, it can be explained (and modeled).
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/232254/how-to-calculate-a-straight-edge-diffraction-pattern

[alancalverd]

It is indeed accurately modelled by wave diffraction, but with my pedant hat on I can't agree that it is explained, since what we actually observe at any point downstream is a quantum phenomenon!

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

26 seconds into the first video you say that diffraction by a single edge can not be explained.

In fact, it can be explained (and modeled).
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/232254/how-to-calculate-a-straight-edge-diffraction-pattern

Don't cut a sentence arbitrarily just to make a point.
I said that deflection of light beam to the left, i.e. the area behind the obstacle, can't be explained by reflection, as well as refraction. It's a separate phenomenon called diffraction.