Young Slits, EPR...

Part 4

Spacetime Model

 
 

Applications

Young Slits, EPR...

This chapter covers applications about electromagnetism and wave-particle duality, such as Young Slits, EPR, E=mc2 etc...


This webpage is the sixth and last part of the website http://www.waves-photons.com
It is strongly suggested to also read the other pages.




 

Displacement of
charged particles

By no means, a moving charged particle can emit other particles called "photons".

Like a stone moving in water, the displacement of a particle produces "eddies" in spacetime. These spacetime perturbations are "quantified EM waves" and have all the characteristics of photons but are not photons. Quantified EM waves are explained in the Photon webpage.

charged_particles.gif - Young slits EPR

 

Changes of orbitals

In the same way, there is no emission of photons when an electron moves from a higher to a lower orbital. This point of view does not make sense scientifically speaking.

The passage of the electron in its wave form from an orbital to another of less energy creates movements in spacetime, like whirpools or eddies in water. These movements are "quantified EM waves".

Finally, the experimenter measures the wave but, since the latter is absorbed by the measurement device, he think that he is facing a photon.

change_orbitals.gif - Young slits EPR

 

Young Slits

To understand this puzzle, it is necessary to forget the photon concept and to consider that the whole experimentation uses only quantified EM waves, as explaned in the Photon webpage.

Let's imagine a group of five EM waves. These waves pass by two slits. Two detectors, right (R) and left (L), count the number of "photons" passing by each slit.

young_slits.gif - Young slits EPR

When a wave reaches an atom of a detector, the energy included in sCells is emptied by a PE effect, Compton Effect, or another effect. The sCells are immediately emptied at the speed of 300,000 km/s. This speed is so high that a wave can't activate two detectors at exactly the same time. In other words, a wave may reach the two detectors at approximately the same time but activates one, and only one at a time. A very short Dt, i.e. a fraction of pS, is sufficient to make the difference.

To better understand this principle, let's replace the five waves of the above figure by five trickles of water (in blue) and the two detectors by two blotting papers.

absorption_photons.gif - Young slits EPR

A trickle would be absorbed by the first blotting paper reached. The first wave is absorbed by the left blotting paper at the red point. The other waves will be absorbed at the green points, due to chance. In any situation, it is obvious that when a trickle has been absorbed by one blotting paper, there is no water left for the second blotting paper.

In spacetime, we have an identical phenomenon. The experimenter thinks he is counting the number of photons whereas he is counting the number of waves absorbed by each detector. As explained, photons do not exist per se. Photon is the mathematical expression of the point of absorption of the quantified waves, here the red and green points of the trickles of water.

Some quantified waves are not absorbed by the detectors and pass through the two slits. In this case, they produce interference fringes (this diffraction pattern is not represented here).


Note: There is a very slight probability, nearly zero, that the two detectors are activated at the same time. In this case, it is logical to think that the energy of the incoming wave is split. For example, a 511 KeV gamma issued from an e+e- annihilation may be detected as two waves of 200 KeV and 311 KeV. Examining the distribution of the measured waves with a coincidence system must highlight this phenomenon, which could be the proof that we measure waves, not photons.



 

Heisenberg Uncertainly Relation

Physicists know the formulation of the Heisenberg (Nobel Prize - 1932) Relation but the basic principle is not obvious. Here is a simple explanation of this phenomenon. The following demonstration concerns an electron and may be extended to other particles.

  • Quantum Mechanics
    The electron passes through point A but has a probability to pass through points B or C. This phenomenon does not make sense but is a reality.
  • Proposed theory
    The wave-particle duality (see Part 2) states: "When the particle is moving, it becomes a wave". Therefore, points A, B and C are all crossed by the electron-wave. We are facing the same phenomena as the Young Slits explained in the preceding paragraph. As in our example of the blotting paper, the wave may be absorbed at point A or, with a lower probability, at points B or C.

To summarize, the Heisenberg Relation is easy to understand if we replace the photon or the particle by its wave equivalent.

heisenberg_relation.gif - Young slits EPR

Note 1: Another explanation considers that the measurement device perturbs the measure.
Note 2: Dx can be replaced by Dp or Dt without affecting the basic principle of Heisenberg Relation. Here, the above explanation has been deliberately simplified for teaching purposes.



 

EPR Paradox

EPR definition

The following description of the Alain Aspect EPR paradox has been deliberated simplified for teaching purposes. In reality, the measurement is done on the spin of particles.

We have a source that emits electron-positron pairs, with electrons sent to destination x, and the positrons sent to destination y. If x detects a polarization (blue for example), y will detect the opposite polarization (red). Conversely, if x detect the red polarization, y will detect the blue one.

Since x and y are completely isolated with respect to each other,
how does "y" know the measurement of "x"?

The Copenhagen interpretation rules say that the wave function "collapses" at the time of measurement, so there must be action at a distance (entanglement), or the positron must know more than it's supposed to (hidden variables).

Trying to understand the EPR mechanism is impossible with good sense using the traditional concept of photon. To understand it, it is necessary to replace photons by quantified waves.

epr.gif - Young slits EPR

EPR explanation

Two waves, "A" and "B", are emitted with a perpendicular polarization of the one compared to the other. These waves are propagated in sCells and are catalysed in x and y.

The two waves reaches each detector.

If he wave "A" (in blue) is detected in point "x" for example, this wave is absorbed and therefore disappears, as explained at the end of the Photon webpage (see also the blotting paper example). The result is that the detecton in "y" has no choice, it detects the wave "B" (in red) since the blue wave does not exist anymore.

In other words:

 
"x" does not detect a photon but a wave.
After its detection, the wave disappears.
So, "y" will automatically detect
the complementary wave.
 

Special case

The Spacetime Model predicts that the anomaly of EPR disappears if the two points of measurement, at 180°, are located far from the point of emission.

The reason is quite simple. In such a case, traditional EM waves become quantified EM waves, and the relationship between the two waves disappears.


 
Theoretically, the "anomaly" of EPR
should not longer exist if the points of
measurements are far from each other
 




 

Mass = Energy?

It is often stated that Mass = Energy. This assertion does not make sense scientifically speaking because mass and energy have two different dimensional quantities: [M] for mass, and [ML2/T2] for energy. It is like comparing a candle and light. A candle can make light but a candle is not light and conversely.

However, the E=mc2 formula is homogeneous because it contains another variable, c2, whose dimension is [L2/T2]. So, the product of Mass [M] by c2 [L2/T2] gives a correct value, [ML2/T2], which is that of energy.




 

E = mc2

This formula, which comes from special relativity, is fully verified by experimentations, but no one is able to explain it using logic and good sense. The solution to this enigma is quite simple.

Let's take again the example of the ballon on the "Waves" webpage.

e_hv.gif - Young slits EPR

The overall process is as follows. The equivalent in quantum mechanics is provided in parenthesis and italics:

  • Step 1
    The balloon is filled with air (the particle is a closed volume).
  • Step 2
    The balloon deflates during a Dt time ("Matter" disappears, like in the e+e- annihilation). This decrease in volume produces waves moving in water (spacetime), which carry some energy. This energy is a function of Dt, i.e. the time of the balloon's deflation (in the same way, the wave energy is E=hn=h/T).
  • Step 3
    When the waves reach the surface, they are converted back to volumes (a gamma may produce back a e+e- pair or other particles. These particles are static areas of spacetime, whereas EM waves are dynamic areas of spacetime. Please see Part 2).

 
So, the loop is closed:  

  1. A volume is transformed in waves
  2. Waves propagates
  3. Waves are converted back to volumes
 

It is important to note that energy appears ONLY in phase 2, in waves. When the closed volume is in a particle state, as in phases 1 and 3, energy does not exist or, more exactly, we are faced with "potential energy".

The E=mc2 formula is very simple to understand if we keep in mind these three points:

  • There is a relationship between mass and closed volume (see Part 1).
  • The particle may become a wave and the converse since they are both made up of spacetime (see the Wave-Corpuscle Duality in Part 2).
  • In the above figure, the balloon has only a potential energy. A particle is an area of spacetime, nothing more. Energy appears when this area becomes a wave (E=hn).



 

Conclusions on E = mc2

 
Particles are closed volumes.

  • When the closed volume disappears, waves
    are produced carrying energy,
  • Waves can be transformed back to closed volumes, i.e. to particles,
  • Particles and waves are both made up spacetime.
 

Notes:
Deeply explanation with mathematics are provided in Part 1.
In the formula E=mc2, c is not related to the particle itself but comes from the speed of the light. This speed, c, must not be confused with the speed of the particle, v, if the latter is moving. Please also note that the explanation given in the present webpage does not modify calculations already in place. All interactions and Feymann diagrams can continue to be used.