I have completed an experiment which I feel chalenges all current models of light.
In this experiment light exits a 630-680 nm laser at station 0.000 meters.
It then passes through a 0.03 millimeter wide slit at 0.195 meters.
The spreading light exiting that slit then passes through two 0.05 millimeter slits 2.00 millimeters apart at 1.137 meters and exits on divergent paths.
The interference or spectral type display of light bands that appears on a target screen at 6.00 meters consist of two center bands 16 millimeters wide ( possibly two overlaping bands ) and numerous 8 millimeter peripheral bands to each side of the center bands at 1 millimeter seperations.
This is commensurate with what could be expected individually from each of the two 0.05 millimeter slits.
However, these bands are in turn seperated into narrower 1 millimeter bands at o.o1 millimeter intervals.
Which could be expected for the double slit pattern.
If one of the double slits is covered the narrow double slit spacing disapears from the remaining slit's pattern.
The slits are configured so that the spreading of the center bands counters the divergence in the center paths.
Thus their inside edges remain on parallel paths.
Next a 2.00 millimeter transverse shield is placed at 1.283 meters, 0.146 meters beyond the double slits, starting in the dark space to the right of the left center band and blocking the peripheral bands to its right, and ending in the dark space to the left of the right center band and blocking the peripheral bands to its left.
This creates a dark corridor between the two large center bands completely void of light.
The larger bands in the display still remain subdivided into the double slit spacing.
Next a longitudinal shield, a 0.05 millimeter thick steel ribbon straightened by tension, is placed inside the 2 millimeter dark corridor from 1.362 meters to 5.889 meters.
This eliminates the double slit band spacing from within the single slit spacing.
Demonstrating that the placing of a shield between two beams of light , without intersecting either path can still affect their paths!
IMPLICATIONS:
I believe that with this experiment the Neils Bohr quantum field model of light came into question as soon as there was an interference pattern in which the path of light to it was known.
Similar models that only require the availability of seperate possible paths for a photon are also discredited because all paths are still available and uninterrupted when the longitudinal shield is introduced.
This includes paths forward and back in time as in the John Cramer transactional model.
The paths ot the Thomas Young type classical wave model are also uninterrupted.
Waves that extend beyond the photon such as the David Bohm type waves that preceed a photon and create a channel for it would be intercepted by the edges of the transverse shield that that lie in the dark space between the individual bands.
This would create a phase shift in the pattern which does not occur.
This would also be true for those models such as the David Chalmers one in which the dark bands are filled with dark light.
Newtonian theories that rely on physical properties, such as the angular momentum of the photon or scattering by the surface of the slit edges also fall short, because none of the surfaces have been removed and the unilluminated longitudinal shield does not add an encountered surface.
It is obvious from this experiment that when the longitudinal shield is placed between the two parallel beams of light and destroys their common double slit pattern it is interrupting a field of influence between photons in one beam and those in the other.
I believe this calls for a new theory [ yes I have one].
For now I am enterested in learning if others view this experiment in the same light.
iconoclast,
Your explanation is a little bit hard to follow.
It would benefit from a few drawings, as you know that a picture can be clearer than a long explanation.
Further, if you have taken pitcures of the results, it would be interresting to show them here too.
(a good drawing could be ok)
Further note that the values of the intensities light be necessary for a detailled analysis.
My first guess is that the beams you are talking about are so well separated.
You know well that diffraction is all about the superposition of diffracted light from all sources. The result of a diffraction experiment is very much depend on the exact intensity profile of the interfering beams, specially if they are not totally separated.
You should try to evaluate all this, starting with a measurement of beam profiles.
You should also figure out how fast the intensity should drop in the lobes of these two beams to avoid the effects you described.
You should also analyse your experimental set up to ensure there will be no spurious reflexions for example from the edges of the slits.
I am quite confident that (assuming there is no experimental problem) your observation will fit with standard optics.
Note that the experiment you have performed has absolutely no relation with Niels Bohr.
You did not perform a quantum optics experiment since you did not observe individual photons in your experiment (this what I guess, but you should make this clearer too). The diffraction patterns in optics is totally described by classical physics, the Maxwell's equations. Quantum mechanics comes into the discussion once individual photons are observed.
Your explanation is a little bit hard to follow.
It would benefit from a few drawings, as you know that a picture can be clearer than a long explanation.
Further, if you have taken pitcures of the results, it would be interresting to show them here too.
(a good drawing could be ok)
Further note that the values of the intensities light be necessary for a detailled analysis.
QUOTE
... placing of a shield between two beams of light ...
My first guess is that the beams you are talking about are so well separated.
You know well that diffraction is all about the superposition of diffracted light from all sources. The result of a diffraction experiment is very much depend on the exact intensity profile of the interfering beams, specially if they are not totally separated.
You should try to evaluate all this, starting with a measurement of beam profiles.
You should also figure out how fast the intensity should drop in the lobes of these two beams to avoid the effects you described.
You should also analyse your experimental set up to ensure there will be no spurious reflexions for example from the edges of the slits.
I am quite confident that (assuming there is no experimental problem) your observation will fit with standard optics.
Note that the experiment you have performed has absolutely no relation with Niels Bohr.
You did not perform a quantum optics experiment since you did not observe individual photons in your experiment (this what I guess, but you should make this clearer too). The diffraction patterns in optics is totally described by classical physics, the Maxwell's equations. Quantum mechanics comes into the discussion once individual photons are observed.
Hello Laibatros, et al.
First of all Welcome to Physorg.
Your experiment implies that the complex wave front produced by the double slits has some sort of standing wave that exists/propagates in the wave front at right angles to the beam/wavefront.
Have you tried different lengths of the longitudinal shield? Moving said shield front to back (between the slits and screen) to see if the interference patterns change?
Is the shield painted black?
Just some questions to help clarify your experiment.
First of all Welcome to Physorg.
Your experiment implies that the complex wave front produced by the double slits has some sort of standing wave that exists/propagates in the wave front at right angles to the beam/wavefront.
Have you tried different lengths of the longitudinal shield? Moving said shield front to back (between the slits and screen) to see if the interference patterns change?
Is the shield painted black?
Just some questions to help clarify your experiment.
Sorry iconoclast and Lalbatros for the name mix-up.
Welcome to Physorg anyways.
Welcome to Physorg anyways.
Thank you Montec and Lalbatros responding to my post. I appreciate it.
Reply to Montec:
No; the longitudinal shield was not painted black.
Yes; I did try different lengths of shield.
I found that the shield only prevents the forming of a double slit pattern where it is present.
Without the shield a faint double slit pattern appears appears after 1.5 meters which becomes clearer with distance.
If the shield starts beyond this distance it has no effect as the pattern has already been established.
If the shield starts close to the double slits then there is no double slit pattern immediately after it regardless of its length.
When light leaves the shield it behaves in forming the double slit pattern as if it just left the double slit.
Forming a faint pattern after 1.5 meters with the spacing that would have otherwise occurred 1.5 meters from the double slit.
I also found that the experiment works with other slit widths and separations.
The experiment posted represents the largest one tried which would be the easiest to duplicate.
The measurements given are approximate.
The only critical considerations are that the inside edges of the center bands remain parallel and that the edges of the transverse shield terminate in the dark between the lighted bands.
Reply to Lalbatros:
I have some scanned sketches and picture that I want to post but I haven't figured out how to do that yet.
I agree that an explanation for interferometry that involves interaction between multiple photons would not explain single photon interferometry.
Unless the same field, in the absence of second photon, can also interact with another slit other than the one the photon core is passing through.
Nor would it explain mass interferometry unless fermons also have this property that the bosons are demonstrating.
This experiment involves a spectral pattern a portion of which requires two separate paths or openings remaining open. Neils Bohr's explanation involving non locality at the slits, a re convergence of probable paths to create a bright line or crest and the final collapse of the quantum probability field into a photon when tested for by the target screen was a milestone in quantum theory.
Note that in this experiment the paths remain separated and the path to each portion is know yet the pattern is still dependent on both paths being open.
Reply to Montec:
No; the longitudinal shield was not painted black.
Yes; I did try different lengths of shield.
I found that the shield only prevents the forming of a double slit pattern where it is present.
Without the shield a faint double slit pattern appears appears after 1.5 meters which becomes clearer with distance.
If the shield starts beyond this distance it has no effect as the pattern has already been established.
If the shield starts close to the double slits then there is no double slit pattern immediately after it regardless of its length.
When light leaves the shield it behaves in forming the double slit pattern as if it just left the double slit.
Forming a faint pattern after 1.5 meters with the spacing that would have otherwise occurred 1.5 meters from the double slit.
I also found that the experiment works with other slit widths and separations.
The experiment posted represents the largest one tried which would be the easiest to duplicate.
The measurements given are approximate.
The only critical considerations are that the inside edges of the center bands remain parallel and that the edges of the transverse shield terminate in the dark between the lighted bands.
Reply to Lalbatros:
I have some scanned sketches and picture that I want to post but I haven't figured out how to do that yet.
I agree that an explanation for interferometry that involves interaction between multiple photons would not explain single photon interferometry.
Unless the same field, in the absence of second photon, can also interact with another slit other than the one the photon core is passing through.
Nor would it explain mass interferometry unless fermons also have this property that the bosons are demonstrating.
This experiment involves a spectral pattern a portion of which requires two separate paths or openings remaining open. Neils Bohr's explanation involving non locality at the slits, a re convergence of probable paths to create a bright line or crest and the final collapse of the quantum probability field into a photon when tested for by the target screen was a milestone in quantum theory.
Note that in this experiment the paths remain separated and the path to each portion is know yet the pattern is still dependent on both paths being open.
Hello iconoclast
Have you tried the experiment with both the transverse and longitudinal shields?
Have you tried the experiment with both the transverse and longitudinal shields?
Hello again Montec
Without any shields there are what appears to be two separate but partially overlapping display patterns with band spacing commensurate with the double slit.
With only the transverse shield in place the overlapping portions are removed.
Only the left portion of the left pattern and the right portion of the right pattern remain with a 2.00 millimeter space between them.
No light is found when tested for anywhere along this 2.00 millimeter dark area.
The transverse shield, while blocking some light paths, does not contribute to the pattern because its edges are in the dark between possible paths.
The pattern is still at the double slit spacing.
Covering one of the slits verifies this as it cause the remaining pattern to revert to the single slit spacing only.
Thus the patterns are dependent on both slits being open, the path to each pattern is known and they do not converge or overlap.
I believe this stage of the experiment is problematic for both quantum theory and classical wave theory.
The next stage of the experiment is even more important.
with the transverse shield still in place the longitudinal shield is placed in the dark strip created by the transverse shield.
This causes both patterns to revert to the single slit spacing only.
Therefore, although not intercepting any light, the shield appears to be disrupting a field of influence between the two separate streams of photons.
Without the transverse shield in place, light hits the edges of the longitudinal shield and reflects off its surface to create a great muddle of a pattern.
Thanks for your question.
Without any shields there are what appears to be two separate but partially overlapping display patterns with band spacing commensurate with the double slit.
With only the transverse shield in place the overlapping portions are removed.
Only the left portion of the left pattern and the right portion of the right pattern remain with a 2.00 millimeter space between them.
No light is found when tested for anywhere along this 2.00 millimeter dark area.
The transverse shield, while blocking some light paths, does not contribute to the pattern because its edges are in the dark between possible paths.
The pattern is still at the double slit spacing.
Covering one of the slits verifies this as it cause the remaining pattern to revert to the single slit spacing only.
Thus the patterns are dependent on both slits being open, the path to each pattern is known and they do not converge or overlap.
I believe this stage of the experiment is problematic for both quantum theory and classical wave theory.
The next stage of the experiment is even more important.
with the transverse shield still in place the longitudinal shield is placed in the dark strip created by the transverse shield.
This causes both patterns to revert to the single slit spacing only.
Therefore, although not intercepting any light, the shield appears to be disrupting a field of influence between the two separate streams of photons.
Without the transverse shield in place, light hits the edges of the longitudinal shield and reflects off its surface to create a great muddle of a pattern.
Thanks for your question.
iconoclast,
If you don't give is a detailled report of your experiment, no discussion will be possible.
We details on the geometry, the beam profiles, the observations, the instruments used, ...
Without such details, there is no challenge at all.
If you don't give is a detailled report of your experiment, no discussion will be possible.
We details on the geometry, the beam profiles, the observations, the instruments used, ...
Without such details, there is no challenge at all.
Hello iconclast
I have a clearer picture of your experiment now. Thank you. This experiment seams to work with my idea of how light moves through space as standing waves continually generating the next standing wave in the cycle. A detailed workup of your experiment would be illuminating.
Thanks
I have a clearer picture of your experiment now. Thank you. This experiment seams to work with my idea of how light moves through space as standing waves continually generating the next standing wave in the cycle. A detailed workup of your experiment would be illuminating.
Thanks
Good to hear from both of you again.
In my original post I detailed the location and size of the elements in this experiment.
If by geometry you mean taking many exact measurements with multiple positions and apertures and frequencies to develop a mathematical formula to predict the exact display measurement for any configuration - I have not done that.
If this was an experiment to measure an already know phenomena or to test for one of two expected outcomes; it would probably be satisfactory.
However, I realize that because this experiment challenges long standing scientific principles it must be duplicated by one or more accredited labs under strict controls before it can be accepted.
I have sent letters and e-mails to individuals and institutions that I thought would be interested in doing this.
So far no takers. I plan to send out more shortly.
I am hoping exposure on this forum will generate interest.
At the least it should confirm or discredit the concept of the experiment and possibly start some consideration of what it will mean if its verified.
Any one who does duplicated and publishes an experiment, that among other things challenges quantum theory, can expect extreme scrutiny and possible personnel criticism - take the Shahriar Afshar experiment as an example.
The laser I used is an off the shelf laser pointer oscillating at between 630 and 680 nano meters ( I wanted something somewhat eye safe ).
The laser aperture and lens could create their own pattern but this is nullified as soon as light passes through the first single slit.
The location of the transverse shield must be exact.
This is achieved by constructing the 2mm shield from two overlapping 1.5mm shields tight against each other.
First with the right slit blocked the left portion of the shield is moved very slowly, while observing the left display 8m away, until only the desired bands are uncovered.
Then the right portion is similarly positioned.
If you want I could list the materials and mounting methods for the other slits and shields; but I don't think it's necessary.
The experiment can be disassembled for transporting and reassembled for demonstration easily.
Observation is visual.
I could have insulated the longitudinal beam and tested electronically for photons and used a photon sensitive detector; but, did not.
It still would not have satisfied the skeptics and at the time I did not think it was necessary.
Visually the difference between 8mm and 1mm bands is obvious.
Likewise when observing the longitudinal shield with the rest of the experiment shield from view, it is if there is no light in the room at all.
It is obvious that there is no significant amount of light hitting the shield if at all.
I believe anyone observing my rudimentary experiment would anticipate the same results with a more refined one
In my original post I detailed the location and size of the elements in this experiment.
If by geometry you mean taking many exact measurements with multiple positions and apertures and frequencies to develop a mathematical formula to predict the exact display measurement for any configuration - I have not done that.
If this was an experiment to measure an already know phenomena or to test for one of two expected outcomes; it would probably be satisfactory.
However, I realize that because this experiment challenges long standing scientific principles it must be duplicated by one or more accredited labs under strict controls before it can be accepted.
I have sent letters and e-mails to individuals and institutions that I thought would be interested in doing this.
So far no takers. I plan to send out more shortly.
I am hoping exposure on this forum will generate interest.
At the least it should confirm or discredit the concept of the experiment and possibly start some consideration of what it will mean if its verified.
Any one who does duplicated and publishes an experiment, that among other things challenges quantum theory, can expect extreme scrutiny and possible personnel criticism - take the Shahriar Afshar experiment as an example.
The laser I used is an off the shelf laser pointer oscillating at between 630 and 680 nano meters ( I wanted something somewhat eye safe ).
The laser aperture and lens could create their own pattern but this is nullified as soon as light passes through the first single slit.
The location of the transverse shield must be exact.
This is achieved by constructing the 2mm shield from two overlapping 1.5mm shields tight against each other.
First with the right slit blocked the left portion of the shield is moved very slowly, while observing the left display 8m away, until only the desired bands are uncovered.
Then the right portion is similarly positioned.
If you want I could list the materials and mounting methods for the other slits and shields; but I don't think it's necessary.
The experiment can be disassembled for transporting and reassembled for demonstration easily.
Observation is visual.
I could have insulated the longitudinal beam and tested electronically for photons and used a photon sensitive detector; but, did not.
It still would not have satisfied the skeptics and at the time I did not think it was necessary.
Visually the difference between 8mm and 1mm bands is obvious.
Likewise when observing the longitudinal shield with the rest of the experiment shield from view, it is if there is no light in the room at all.
It is obvious that there is no significant amount of light hitting the shield if at all.
I believe anyone observing my rudimentary experiment would anticipate the same results with a more refined one
Hi iconoclast,
I am not criticizing here but I can't see the point of your experiment and why you have designed it in such a way. A good experiment shows something up from the results by design. I tend to think that without something extraordinary or images of your pattern or at least a plan of your setup it is just normal interference. It is not up to people to guess what it is you are doing it is up to you to design a good experiment to show a very defined point. What you seem to be doing is setting something up that I doubt could be reproduced from our point of view. I can't determine what part the "shields" play and what a "shield" actually is or its ultimate purpose. It seems that you are arranging things quite specially but you have not said why.
From what you have said it could be the LASER is producing more than one frequency of "red" radiation. In other words the cavity is not "tuned". It would produce a number of mutually interfering lines that are source coherent which may all be in the red end of the spectrum. Each separate frequency will create its own double slit experiment with lines reflecting different spacings dependent on the formula. On top of this they are likely to be mutually source coherent and will probably mutually interfere.
The double slit experiment is all we need to know about at first... do you duplicate that EXACT pattern first off??? You have not indicated that is the first step in this chain of events. That will necessarily be your first stop. If something does not add up or is not as expected, determine what is wrong or different about your setup first.
Double Slit Diffraction
Cheers
I am not criticizing here but I can't see the point of your experiment and why you have designed it in such a way. A good experiment shows something up from the results by design. I tend to think that without something extraordinary or images of your pattern or at least a plan of your setup it is just normal interference. It is not up to people to guess what it is you are doing it is up to you to design a good experiment to show a very defined point. What you seem to be doing is setting something up that I doubt could be reproduced from our point of view. I can't determine what part the "shields" play and what a "shield" actually is or its ultimate purpose. It seems that you are arranging things quite specially but you have not said why.
From what you have said it could be the LASER is producing more than one frequency of "red" radiation. In other words the cavity is not "tuned". It would produce a number of mutually interfering lines that are source coherent which may all be in the red end of the spectrum. Each separate frequency will create its own double slit experiment with lines reflecting different spacings dependent on the formula. On top of this they are likely to be mutually source coherent and will probably mutually interfere.
The double slit experiment is all we need to know about at first... do you duplicate that EXACT pattern first off??? You have not indicated that is the first step in this chain of events. That will necessarily be your first stop. If something does not add up or is not as expected, determine what is wrong or different about your setup first.
Double Slit Diffraction
Cheers
Hi iconoclast,
Excellent stuff .. but we really do need a drawing to make sense of it .. PM me if you have a drawing and need somewhere to 'host' it as Physorg doesn't store user images.
Without a drawing I guess you have prevented light from one slit reaching the diffraction zone of the other .. so (obviously) no interference between light from (say) slit A and slit B because there is only light from one or the other at your detection point. If that isn't the explanation .. I'm sorry its the best I can do without a drawing.
Things to watch out for
If your slits are made of a (possibly) reflective material then reflections from the slit edges can give you a two slit interference type pattern from a single slit.
If your barrier can reflect light then you can get an interference pattern from the light reflected off the barrier and the actual slit .. the reflection can create a virtual slit that works just as well as a real one.
On this forum .. some of the theories to explain interference are unusual (to say the least) .. if you have time it might be nice if you could (later) try out things to prove/disprove some of these ideas.
And of course your own ideas..
Best wishes - C2.
Excellent stuff .. but we really do need a drawing to make sense of it .. PM me if you have a drawing and need somewhere to 'host' it as Physorg doesn't store user images.
QUOTE
It is obvious from this experiment that when the longitudinal shield is placed between the two parallel beams of light and destroys their common double slit pattern it is interrupting a field of influence between photons in one beam and those in the other.
Without a drawing I guess you have prevented light from one slit reaching the diffraction zone of the other .. so (obviously) no interference between light from (say) slit A and slit B because there is only light from one or the other at your detection point. If that isn't the explanation .. I'm sorry its the best I can do without a drawing.
Things to watch out for
If your slits are made of a (possibly) reflective material then reflections from the slit edges can give you a two slit interference type pattern from a single slit.
If your barrier can reflect light then you can get an interference pattern from the light reflected off the barrier and the actual slit .. the reflection can create a virtual slit that works just as well as a real one.
On this forum .. some of the theories to explain interference are unusual (to say the least) .. if you have time it might be nice if you could (later) try out things to prove/disprove some of these ideas.
And of course your own ideas..
Best wishes - C2.
wrong thread - sorry
Greetings C2
You are correct I have separated the light from slit "A" and slit "B".
But; surprise, the interference pattern is still two separated portions of the "AB" double slit one.
Bigger surprise, placing a shield or barrier in the dark corridor between the two beams of light returns the pattern to the two separate single "A" and "B" patterns.
Traditionalist will probably assume that I have not completely separated the two beams of light and that the shield is merely interrupting the interference field.
However, I believe that eventually the opposite will be confirmed.
You are correct I have separated the light from slit "A" and slit "B".
But; surprise, the interference pattern is still two separated portions of the "AB" double slit one.
Bigger surprise, placing a shield or barrier in the dark corridor between the two beams of light returns the pattern to the two separate single "A" and "B" patterns.
Traditionalist will probably assume that I have not completely separated the two beams of light and that the shield is merely interrupting the interference field.
However, I believe that eventually the opposite will be confirmed.