Hey everyone, this is the work a friend of mine has been working on recently and over the past few years, anyone familiar with this paradox should know the implications for new technologies which could arise, should this theory be proven correct. It is a long read though very interesting in theory. She has done it all on her own.
http://www.faradayschild.com/
- It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 3:39 pm • All times are UTC + 10 hours [ DST ]
Wave partical duality paradox solved?
Moderators: rick, Mark Bassett
4 posts
• Page 1 of 1
"Why hasn't the theory been tested"
From the look of that site because a small scale lab test (which is the sort of thing a uni would do) hasn't been done and published in a peer reviewed journal.
I'd like cheap power as much as everybody, but I'm always very sceptical about these sort of things.
From the look of that site because a small scale lab test (which is the sort of thing a uni would do) hasn't been done and published in a peer reviewed journal.
I'd like cheap power as much as everybody, but I'm always very sceptical about these sort of things.
- JulienG
- Regular Contributor
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:02 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
Sorry, Heath, this looks a bit dodgy to me as well.
You know Einstein right? E=mc2
Well there's another formula for wave energy E=hv (where v is the wavelength)
and because energy is constant mc2 = hv or m = hv / c2
now c and h are constants, so lets call the number h/c2 "Heath".
mass = Heath x wavelength
All matter has a wavelength based on its mass, and will act as both a particle and as a wave. That's how matter behaves. This is dismissed as the "there is no paradox" group, but in fact is what most currently believe. Or to think of it in a slightly different way, a single particle acts like a particle, but a bunch of them act like a wave (and hence the music link in all this: subatomic particles LOVE mosh pits).
The problem with the "easy" theory is that it doesn't match the two slit test results. Take a look at the 10 seconds picture on slide 22. The bands are all of equal intensity. If the "easy" theory were true, the central bands should be of higher intensity because of the shorter distance the electrons have to travel means more will have arrived there (see slides 31 and 34).
PS: quantum physics explains the universe with just 12 particles. Its not that difficult or complicated.
You know Einstein right? E=mc2
Well there's another formula for wave energy E=hv (where v is the wavelength)
and because energy is constant mc2 = hv or m = hv / c2
now c and h are constants, so lets call the number h/c2 "Heath".
mass = Heath x wavelength
All matter has a wavelength based on its mass, and will act as both a particle and as a wave. That's how matter behaves. This is dismissed as the "there is no paradox" group, but in fact is what most currently believe. Or to think of it in a slightly different way, a single particle acts like a particle, but a bunch of them act like a wave (and hence the music link in all this: subatomic particles LOVE mosh pits).
The problem with the "easy" theory is that it doesn't match the two slit test results. Take a look at the 10 seconds picture on slide 22. The bands are all of equal intensity. If the "easy" theory were true, the central bands should be of higher intensity because of the shorter distance the electrons have to travel means more will have arrived there (see slides 31 and 34).
PS: quantum physics explains the universe with just 12 particles. Its not that difficult or complicated.
-
chris p - Frequent Contributor
- Posts: 882
- Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 6:15 pm
- Location: Sydney, NSW
Hey Chris, I think this theory does not relate to wave theory as the measurable "wavelength" of light in this theory relates to photon spin as opposed to an actual waveform, IE:the different rate of spin for all the different colours in the spectrum , I could be wrong.
I'll see if I can get her to post here next time we catch up and answer any questions you have posed, also to check any flaws which may be seen, or to explain further.The thing is I'm not a physicist, this is the reason I posted the link here as there are a few great minds floating around, was just out of interest and for some debate.
Also this is a basic presentation, the simulations which have been carried out were all done on computer with a new type of logic which she says she has designed. I dunno time will tell.
The reason no physical lab tests have been carried out is because of cost, she says she needs a couple of $$Mill to test the theory properly in a lab with an interferometer. These tests are very expensive as in lab time and equipment costs.
She is in negotiation with a Japanese organisation for funding to test the theory, as mentioned in her presentation many Australians and Americans have been approached to test this theory but none are interested.
You must agree alot more money has been wasted chasing far wilder theories. Anyway was just something I thought a few of guys may be interested in reading.
Cheers
Heath
I'll see if I can get her to post here next time we catch up and answer any questions you have posed, also to check any flaws which may be seen, or to explain further.The thing is I'm not a physicist, this is the reason I posted the link here as there are a few great minds floating around, was just out of interest and for some debate.
Also this is a basic presentation, the simulations which have been carried out were all done on computer with a new type of logic which she says she has designed. I dunno time will tell.
The reason no physical lab tests have been carried out is because of cost, she says she needs a couple of $$Mill to test the theory properly in a lab with an interferometer. These tests are very expensive as in lab time and equipment costs.
She is in negotiation with a Japanese organisation for funding to test the theory, as mentioned in her presentation many Australians and Americans have been approached to test this theory but none are interested.
You must agree alot more money has been wasted chasing far wilder theories. Anyway was just something I thought a few of guys may be interested in reading.
Cheers
Heath
-
heathen - Valued Contributor
- Posts: 1745
- Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 11:15 pm
- Location: Sydney
4 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Return to Inspirational Websites
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest