On a contextual model refuting Bell's theorem

John,

Visible 'light' has a very, very much smaller wavelength than microwaves. So cooking inside can be seen because of the visible 'light' wavelengths passing through. The microwave wavelength is about 12cm. I have read that waves van pass easily through an aperture of diameter 1/4 their wavelength. It gets less likely transmission will occur the smaller than 1/4 wavelength the hole's diameter. At about 1/120 of the microwave wavelength the perforated screen is, I presume, as impenetrable to the microwaves as a solid barrier. A photon is an amount of energy. A change of existence happening over time. Only whole photons are detectable, As only they can cause change to an atom/ shift the energy level of an electron. I.e. that amount of energy is the minimum for a change that can be detected.

Georgina,

I haven't been aware of those specific ratios, but it is along the lines I have contemplated. Perhaps what we call a (measured) photon consists of more than one waveform and is self sustaining as a gravitationally discrete soloton which could be modeled as a 3D packet of energy. The perf size might be indicative of the effective diameter of an electrostatic density response with the magnetic density reactive domain of the metallic screen material(?), given Maxwell's determination that the intensities of a point charge exhibit a c proportional difference between electric and magnetic influence. The screen acts effectively as an antennae. thanks for the thoughts, I'm sure Steve finds a fit also. jrc

John,

soliton is a good description. 'Particle' works in "the least possible amount" meaning [2], as they are the minimum detectable amount. The other meaning of 'particle'[1] seems to suit fermions, atoms and ions.

From Oxford Languages: particle noun !. a minute portion of matter 2.the least possible amount

Georgina,

IN CONTEXT, with this topic the question of what is a particle goes to the QM treatment of superposition as argued by Agnew et al, and a classical description. And of course QM treats a photon as a massless particle. And as of yet, classicism hasn't produced a particle model which is sufficient to account for the characteristic behaviors observed in what we assume to be particulate matter. That kind of leaves to discussion open to interpretation, but what I personally keep going back to is simply that IF and Only If there is a physical connectivity (not to be conflated with material) across a light separable distance then the violation of inequalities would be explained. I just do not accept the conventional paradigm that the primary force effects peter out to infinity. I model them as local and time-wise self limiting relative to mass. jrc

Hi FQXi friends, all this is very philosophical about what is really a photon and its origin. The same could be asked about what is really an electron . A photon is seen actually like a quantum of light, so having also the ability to change its wavelenghts and can be stored in the electromagnetic wave. It is simply a quantum of E , a quantum of Heat , able to change its wavelenghts , but the real question how inside this photon. You know my model now with the series of 3D spheres, so the changes of a photon are incredicle in their complexity seen the number of these series having the same number than the comsological finite number. See also the relevance of rotations motions, oscillations of these spherical volumes of this quanta of light. And is they are encoded in this space vacuum coded of the DE with the cold dark matter , so that becomes interesting for the disptributions of properties of matters created when they fuse. They are massless travelling at c and there are reasons because without this we cannot observe. The electromagnetic fields and radio waves are due to this light but the complexity of encodings in this space vacuum is complex and imply a distribution of matter and the other forces also due to this number of photons encoded and their waves. See also that it becomes relevant when this dark matter cold is encoded also , because they permit with the higgs mechanism activated by the photons encoded to create the mass, it is like if this space vacuum coded possesssed an energy and codes and that the mass of the DM and the quantum of light permitted to activate what they must become these matters. Of course it is just my interpretation but see that all can be ranked and understood with rational proportions of the 3 series merging and these spherical volumes in motions and oscillations. The interactions of exchanges also can be understood and ranked.

When I tell that the strings and this GR alone have created a philosophical prison, it is not false, the thinkers turn in round in forgetting to return at this old school of proportions. The maths are essential but when the abstract maths are utilised and that the philosophy general is limited, that implies an ocean of confusions and irrational extrapolations. There is nothing of really odd with the light and if hidden variables exist they don t come for me from external hideen fields but they come from the matters and are not still analysed due problems of scales and philosophy. The space vacuum of this DE seems the key.....

Steve, You state: "They are massless travelling at c..."

So do they exhibit properties we associate with mass rather than energy when they are slowed or stopped by entrapment by an energetic EM field or absorbed (slowed to a relative stop) by an electron or nucleon. If so then wouldn't that suggest that density of energy varies in relation with a velocity which references some characteristic of its own discrete (3D sphere) form, rather than some external object for reference? jrc

Hi John,

I beleive that the origin of our topologies geometries , properties don t come from this GR and the fields in resume, I believe strongly that there is an enormpous philosophical problem in considering these photons like the only one primoridal essence of this universe and that they oscillate , vibrate at this planck scale in 1D connected with the EFE and the GR like a 1D cosmic field of this GR.

I beleive that they are just a fuel for the matters baryonic ordinary and permit the electromagnetic fields and the heat. I believe and it is just my interpretation that the electromagnetism is emergent from this coded space vacuum of this DE anti gravitational. This vacuum coded encodes in resume these photons and this cold dark matter permitting to mass and matters baryonic to emerge. That is why this central cosmological sphere if it exists intrigues me a lot because this thing sends the informations in these series of 3D spheres and is a kind of super matter energy. The real informations primoridal so are in this vacuum , we utilise the waves for our computers and the photons and sound waves but they are informations that we have created, the universe is for a deeper logic about the real primoridal informations.

These photons and cold dark matter when they merge with this vacuum in my model preserve the volumes, the number of the serie does not change, so the densities and properties of spherical volumes, yes, and the symplectomorphisms preserving the volumes can explain the deformations and assymetries permitting the uniqueness of things. That is why even all is unique even us,the planets, stars.....This evolution so becomes essential. All in resume is a little bit the same when the motions are not there but when the fuels permit to activate the properties of this vacuum, they create all the diversity of the mendeleev table more the complexity of interactions of exchanges in physics, chemistry and biology more the evolution and even this consciousness. So indeed the densities are essential and seem a key like the motions rotations and oscillations of these spherical volumes.

The mass also is emergent from this vacuum of the DE. An interesting point also is that the evolution can be predicted because we have this DM and DE disponible at this cosmological scale and the life death also can be correlated like the recycling due to photons and electromagnetic fields, because all seems to have a life time. The real complex thing to know so is the informations of this space vacuum and why we are conscious and what is the future of all this. The GR of course is a beautiful intepretation of einstein having interpreted the gravitation like a curvature of the space time at high velocities, he is right for this referential, newton also is right for his referential at slow velocities like a force between mass. But if the gravitation is the main chief orchestra balances between the anti gracvitation of the DE and the gravitation of the ordinary matter, that becomes fasciating to consider it like the main chief orchestra.

That is why this Quantum gravitation is not an emergent electromagnetic force in my reasoning that I have quantified. If you take the distances not of protons and electrons ,and that you consider this space vacuum coded and the cold dark matter encoded, that explains the animatter and the QG.....Friendly

Hi John, I don't understand why" IF and Only If there is a physical connectivity.." J.C. Is the results being probabilistic the issue?? If Alice and Bob are operating independently on their own local measurements, probabilistic results are to be expected. For 3 settings X, y, Z, 1/3 of the time choosing settings that give symmetry keeping (anti) correlation. 2/3 of the time 505 same outcome as (anti)correlation; But not from symmetry keeping but probabilistic outcome when two 'values' are available. Treating all outcomes as having the same influence is problematic. There is a symmetry imparted at pair production maintained if treated symmetrically .Lost as soon as the particles undergo asymmetric treatments. How the results fit with space-time is an issue. It has to go rather than superdeterminism, or Many worlds being needed.

That should say "2/3 of the time 50% same outcome as..."

Georgina,

Going back to the simplified illustration of a Bell-Aspect experiment, being a point light source midway between two polarizers and a photomultiplier detector beyond each of the polarizers so that a flash of light will register by the detectors. On average; if the polarizers are aligned in the same direction, both detectors will register. If the polarizers are aligned at right angle to each other, on average only one detector will register but the probability of which one will is that which you have laid out. STILL, the point is that only one detector will register and that suggests that there is a physical connectivity which is sustained between the emission source and the transit of the photonic pulses going in opposite directions. Yet we have to contend with the fact that the light source is a highly complex aggregate of atomic structure and that a multitude of photonic emissions must be being generated by a single energizing if the circuit that makes the trick bulb flash.

In a relativistic field paradigm (my own personal preference, others need not agree) the term "hidden variable" is not hidden at all, because in a 'spacetime' regime Time is just as physically real as is the particulate matter of the emitter and other elements of the experimental device, so is Space. The variables of the complex light source atomic structure may be subsumed in a locally global domain as a composite Transition Zone which modulates the frequency of the emitted EMR into a coherent (classical, Webster's Dictionary definition, not the intentional backwards definition of QM) soloton having a volumetric waveform. And in a relativistic reference frame there is a Time-wise rigid connection between the two solotons across the source that is just as real as if it were a steel rod. First one to put a QKE system into global operation will control the world's transfer of billions of digital dollars per hour. You pays your money and you places your bet. jrc

Hi John,

you overcome the need for superluminal communication using the waveforms to direct the outcomes. I think you are talking about relative phase. Which could explain the symmetry keeping/loosing, for photons. With space-time there still has to be the singular outcomes already in spacetime or all possible outcomes in the spacetime of the Many Words multiverse. The first option means giving up the freewill to even select a setting or angle. For Many Worlds too free will is not possible as all options must be chosen by versions of the experimenter. Which do you favour? I think giving up outcome deteerminism (so called Realism) required by a spacetime environment is the 'lesser evil', compared to superluminal communication (so called non locality), superdeterminism or Many Worlds.

Describe the volumetric shape of a 'photon'.

Describe the volumetric shape of a 'photon'.

John your question seems to presume that the photon is like a solid object, We do not know that. it is an amount of energy. I have proposed that it is a disturbance of the base existence. It moves at the speed of light in a vacuum. Slightly slower when passing through an other medium. That makes saying where one is problematic. Like the fastest cake in the world- Scone (said quickly with a northern English dialect.) They have to be intercepted to say where one was. I've read visible light has a wavelength of 380 to 700nm. So very tiny but very nippy.

A photon prior to detection is not a phenomenon. I used to think a phenomenon is just something that happens. It is not. It is something apparent through sense or senses; "observed to exist or happen" Oxford languages. Instead the undetected photon is a noumenon, beable, an actualization using my own terminology; a thing that exists independently of observation or measurement. Spacetime models the experience of phenomena.

Georgina,

I do understand your imperative to classify terminology, and I also have referred to common English language definitions to qualify in discussion what I mean. However, I think that it is counterproductive to impose a personalized scheme of new words on what the conventions of scientific discourse have long established. Various words are often argued in qualification, and there is often disagreement as to what duly constitutes what some word might be. Such it is with "phenomenon", which one might argue as an existential event or physical entity whether it is observed or not, while others will argue that all exists in a coherent state of superposition until an actual measurement is made. You are of course free to make up your own paradigm as you engage your thought and evolve conclusions, just keep in mind that to communicate your thoughts it will require that you must assume the pedagogical role to explain word usage that resolve back to meanings that others already customarily use.

As to my preferred paradigm and my simple challenge, 'Describe the volumetric shape of a photon'... I refer you and Dr. Agnew back to the thread in this topic started by R. McEachern with 3 replies shown and 28 hidden, and my two posts on May 23 @ 13:55 and 14:37. That's not the whole model but it certainly goes beyond Maxwell, though I doubt any of us follows every post of everbody else and I don't expect Dr. Agnew to pay much attention to me.

I'm going to take a break for a while, I have some time sensitive matters which by necessity and legal practicality I must be catching up. best to all for now...jrc

phenomenon Wikipedia" thing appearing to view'; plural phenomena) is an observable fact or event. The term came into its modern philosophical usage through Immanuel Kant, who contrasted it with the noumenon, which cannot be directly observed".

I have not made up my own meaning of the word 'phenomenon'. As I said I used to misunderstand it.

Photon of EM radiation is a noumenon.

Flash of light in a darkened room and click of a photomultiplier are phenomena that might also be refeed to as a photon. Those phenomena are observations that show the photon had existence.

The volumetric shape of the photon depends on the photon spectrum and can vary quite a bit. In the transform limit, a sinc pulse defines both the time volume as well as the frequency volume spectra.

There are both electric and magnetic field oscillations for a photon and a photon can carry information as both amplitude and phase, or intensity and polarization.Attachment #1: photonOscillation.JPGAttachment #2: photonTransformLimit.JPG