Let us then consider one fundamentally important argument of Feynman's that light must be a particle.




Let us then consider one fundamentally important argument of Feynman's that light must be a particle.

For many years after Newton, partial reflection by two surfaces was happily explained by a theory of waves,* but when experiments were made with very weak light hitting photomultipliers, the wave theory collapsed: as the light got dimmer and dimmer, the photomultipliers kept making full sized clicks - there were just fewer of them. Light behaves as particles.
* This idea made use of the fact that waves can combine or cancel out, and the calculations based on this model matched the results of Newton's experiments, as well as those done for hundreds of years afterwards. But when experiments were developed that were sensitive enough to detect a single photon, the wave theory predicted that the clicks of a photomultiplier would get softer and softer, whereas they stayed at full strength - they just occurred less and less often. No reasonable model could explain this fact.
This state of confusion was called the wave - particle duality of light. (Feynman, 1985)

Feynman though is incorrect in two ways;
Firstly, he is making unjustified assumptions beyond what is observed. It is true that light energy is emitted and absorbed in discrete amounts between two electrons. But we DO NOT OBSERVE any 'Particles' - we only observe discrete energy exchanges!
Secondly, the solution is to realize that the Spherical Standing Wave Structure of Matter actually demands that all energy exchanges for light be of discrete amounts because this is what occurs for 'Resonant Coupling', and for standing Wave interactions in general.

It is also interesting to see how simply Feynman summarizes QED;

So now, I present to you the three basic actions, from which all the phenomena of light and electrons arise.
-Action #1: A photon goes from place to place.
-Action #2: An electron goes from place to place.
-Action #3: An electron emits or absorbs a photon.

This can now be simplified to two actions with the WSM;
Action #1: An Electron, as the Wave-Center of a Spherical Standing Wave, goes from place to place in Space (as determined by the spherical In-Waves.)
Action #2: An Electron resonantly couples with another Electron (emits or absorbs a photon)

Once we realise that there are no separate electron or photon particles, thus we remove the problem as to how an electron particle can interact with a separate photon particle! Thus this solution is actually more consistent (and simpler) than Feynman's QED, particularly when we consider Feynman's further explanation of a positron being an electron which goes backwards in Time.

The backwards-moving electron when viewed with time moving forwards appears the same as an ordinary electron, except that it is attracted to normal electrons - we say it has a positive charge. For this reason it's called a positron. The positron is a sister particle to the electron, and is an example of an anti-particle. ..This phenomena is general. Every particle in Nature has an amplitude to move backwards in time, and therefore has an anti-particle. (Feynman, 1985)

As Wolff explains this is simply a mathematical truth caused by the fact that a negative time in the wave equations changes the phase of the standing waves to be equal and opposite, which corresponds to antimatter. (Antimatter does no move 'backwards in time'!)
Further, notice what Feynman says about photons, which are treated as particles in QED, and thus by Feynman's logic there should also be anti-photons, whereas the WSM is clear on this point - there are anti-electrons (positrons) which are opposite phase Spherical Standing Waves, but there are no separate photon particles, thus no anti-photons!

And what about photons? Photons look exactly the same in all respects when they travel backwards in time, so they are their own anti-particles. You see how clever we are at making an exception part of the rule! (Feynman, 1985)

While it may be clever, it is not good philosophy, and it has led to a very confused and absurd modern physics. Surely it is time for physicists to start considering the fundamental theoretical problems of the existing theories and to appreciate that the Metaphysics of Space and Motion and the Spherical Wave Structure of Matter is a simple, sensible, and obvious way to solve these problems!
Finally, let us explain how we can experimentally confirm the Spherical Wave Structure of Matter (which would obviously be very convincing to the skeptics!)Quantum-Physics

12NextPage





Download links for : << Quantum Theory: Wolff's Erläuterung des Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen (EPR) Experiment & weitere Voraussagen >>
"Let us then consider one fundamentally important argument of Feynman's that light must be a particle."


How to Download
You may need eMule or Bittorrent to download ebook torrents or emule links.

Report Dead Link
Please leave a comment to report dead links, so that someone else may update new links.


Search More...

[share-ebook]Let us then consider one fundamentally important argument of Feynman's that light must be a particle.

Google

Related Books


Books related to :

<< Quantum Theory: Wolff's Erläuterung des Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen (EPR) Experiment & weitere Voraussagen

The Solution to the Problem of there being NO Vector Wave Solutions of Maxwell's >>


The New York Times rss

    Google

    Let us then consider one fundamentally important argument of Feynman's that light must be a particle.

    Let us then consider one fundamentally important argument of Feynman's that light must be a particle.

    For many years after Newton, partial reflection by two surfaces was happily explained by a theory of waves,* but when experiments were made with very weak light hitting photomultipliers, the wave theory collapsed: as the light got dimmer and dimmer, the photomultipliers kept making full sized clicks - there were just fewer of them. Light behaves as particles.
    * This idea made use of the fact that waves can combine or cancel out, and the calculations based on this model matched the results of Newton's experiments, as well as those done for hundreds of years afterwards. But when experiments were developed that were sensitive enough to detect a single photon, the wave theory predicted that the clicks of a photomultiplier would get softer and softer, whereas they stayed at full strength - they just occurred less and less often. No reasonable model could explain this fact.
    This state of confusion was called the wave - particle duality of light. (Feynman, 1985)

    Feynman though is incorrect in two ways;
    Firstly, he is making unjustified assumptions beyond what is observed. It is true that light energy is emitted and absorbed in discrete amounts between two electrons. But we DO NOT OBSERVE any 'Particles' - we only observe discrete energy exchanges!
    Secondly, the solution is to realize that the Spherical Standing Wave Structure of Matter actually demands that all energy exchanges for light be of discrete amounts because this is what occurs for 'Resonant Coupling', and for standing Wave interactions in general.

    It is also interesting to see how simply Feynman summarizes QED;

    So now, I present to you the three basic actions, from which all the phenomena of light and electrons arise.
    -Action #1: A photon goes from place to place.
    -Action #2: An electron goes from place to place.
    -Action #3: An electron emits or absorbs a photon.

    This can now be simplified to two actions with the WSM;
    Action #1: An Electron, as the Wave-Center of a Spherical Standing Wave, goes from place to place in Space (as determined by the spherical In-Waves.)
    Action #2: An Electron resonantly couples with another Electron (emits or absorbs a photon)

    Once we realise that there are no separate electron or photon particles, thus we remove the problem as to how an electron particle can interact with a separate photon particle! Thus this solution is actually more consistent (and simpler) than Feynman's QED, particularly when we consider Feynman's further explanation of a positron being an electron which goes backwards in Time.

    The backwards-moving electron when viewed with time moving forwards appears the same as an ordinary electron, except that it is attracted to normal electrons - we say it has a positive charge. For this reason it's called a positron. The positron is a sister particle to the electron, and is an example of an anti-particle. ..This phenomena is general. Every particle in Nature has an amplitude to move backwards in time, and therefore has an anti-particle. (Feynman, 1985)

    As Wolff explains this is simply a mathematical truth caused by the fact that a negative time in the wave equations changes the phase of the standing waves to be equal and opposite, which corresponds to antimatter. (Antimatter does no move 'backwards in time'!)
    Further, notice what Feynman says about photons, which are treated as particles in QED, and thus by Feynman's logic there should also be anti-photons, whereas the WSM is clear on this point - there are anti-electrons (positrons) which are opposite phase Spherical Standing Waves, but there are no separate photon particles, thus no anti-photons!

    And what about photons? Photons look exactly the same in all respects when they travel backwards in time, so they are their own anti-particles. You see how clever we are at making an exception part of the rule! (Feynman, 1985)

    While it may be clever, it is not good philosophy, and it has led to a very confused and absurd modern physics. Surely it is time for physicists to start considering the fundamental theoretical problems of the existing theories and to appreciate that the Metaphysics of Space and Motion and the Spherical Wave Structure of Matter is a simple, sensible, and obvious way to solve these problems!
    Finally, let us explain how we can experimentally confirm the Spherical Wave Structure of Matter (which would obviously be very convincing to the skeptics!)Quantum-Physics