1,406 reputation
512
bio website marty-green.blogspot.com
location Canada
age
visits member for 4 years, 1 month
seen 3 hours ago

Dec
6
comment Testing my understanding of QM - The Double Slit Experiment without the slit
@harry I hope you will read the article which I linked to above. In it I show how the statistics of detection are the same if you model photons or continuous waves. It seems in quantum mechanics you are really not allowed to say that just because a particle was detected here, it must have been emitted from there at such-and-such a time. It's one of those delicate balancing acts between what we're allowed to know and what we're not. A pea-shooter would hugely upset that balance.
Dec
6
comment Testing my understanding of QM - The Double Slit Experiment without the slit
marty-green.blogspot.com/2010/02/clicking-detectors.html
Dec
5
comment Decay from excited state to ground state
Thanks, Harry. We're so deep into the comment field that it's hard to deal in more than the vaguest generalities, but it's a welcome change to have someone agree with me.
Dec
5
comment Decay from excited state to ground state
Ron, you still haven't read the articles I posted on my blog.
Dec
5
comment How is the double slit experiment modeled in contemporary physical theories?
It is interesting that the authors of the paper argue that until March of this year, my position was the correct one: that we did not yet have a pea-shooter for electrons. The authors claim to have recently gotten around this constraint. I'm betting that they haven't.
Dec
5
revised Testing my understanding of QM - The Double Slit Experiment without the slit
responding to multiple arguments in the comments.
Dec
5
comment Testing my understanding of QM - The Double Slit Experiment without the slit
It is true that the OP designated the velocity of the outgoing wave by c, which is usually reserved for the speed of light. It is also true that I "blithely" assumed he meant the velocity of the electron wave function. I do not understand why you take this to be evidence of some kind of character flaw on my part. As for your other points I don't have room to deal with them in the comment field so I am going to reply to them in an edit to my answer.
Dec
5
comment Testing my understanding of QM - The Double Slit Experiment without the slit
Bingo? I doubt it. Can you use the electrons you've supposedly generated to carry out the OP's experiment? In other words, you create them at will and detect them with certainty in one of two detectors? You method with photons, of course, doesn't work: the detection statistics you get are identical to what you would have for a classical wave whose detection probability is proportional to its intensity. There are no pea-shooters for photons.
Dec
5
comment Decay from excited state to ground state
I'm pretty sure a laser is actually one of the situations where you get exact results if you treat the e-m field classically.
Dec
5
comment Testing my understanding of QM - The Double Slit Experiment without the slit
It's what the OP (David) talked about when he said "we tell the emitter to produce a single electron". We just don't have a way of telling our electron emitters to do that.
Dec
5
answered How is the double slit experiment modeled in contemporary physical theories?
Dec
5
answered Testing my understanding of QM - The Double Slit Experiment without the slit
Dec
3
comment Interaction of matter with EM fields
Did you even read my articles?
Dec
2
awarded  Quorum
Dec
2
comment Interaction of matter with EM fields
Of course you know that Lamb never really believed in photons either.
Dec
2
comment Interaction of matter with EM fields
The silver film is the toughest because unlike all your other photon-counting detectors, you don't plug it into the wall. So there's no obvious source for the energy other than the incoming light.
Dec
2
answered Interaction of matter with EM fields
Dec
1
comment Decay from excited state to ground state
I wouldn't object to Ron so much if he called my method "conceptually a bit awkward", although I might disagree with that characterization. I find it tiresome that he calls my reasoning "nonsensical" and "completely wrong".
Dec
1
comment Decay from excited state to ground state
I am not describing BKS theory. BKS predated the Schroeding equation, and my theory depends on the Schroedinger atom. And in my theory there is no need for an atomic transition to be driven completely. Since there are no such things as photons, a passing light wave can partially excite the p state in any number of hydrogen atoms.
Dec
1
answered Decay from excited state to ground state