The Present State of Physics, Mathematics, and Science

How is there an interference pattern already there, to serve as a guide? Possibilities: a). maybe from previous photon's travel using both slits but individually only one each. It requires interference of the effect of different photons and persistence of the disturbance; long enough to affect another. b) It is an effect due to the apparatus structure. Maybe miniscule vibration is enough to create 'environmental waves from the slits. c) An environmental disturbance (undetectable except by consequences) travelling ahead of the detectable photon passes through both slits/interferes, followed by detectable photon passing through just one.

Non of these have a photon taking two paths but could result in an 'as if ' appearance.

I'm unclear about the effect of a switched off detector. I read somewhere that the interference pattern is only lost if on. Is that so, or pop misinterpretation? If the 'which way detector is a polarizer ( rather than detection chamber or tube with a voltage),used asymmetrically it is altering the proposed environmental interference pattern that affects what the detectable photon does.

Georgi,

Just an offering, there is no lack of explanatory ideas out here. I'm not clear about an interference pattern being produced by a single slit, I'll have to browse up on that. The hype for the build up of single dots would be explained by the detection element of the apparatus naturally slowing the soliton to relative rest by its encounter with the EM fields of the material screen; hence it would become inelastic and particulate in effect. The model gets involved and being a personal endeavor doesn't deserve my beating my own drum on this topic. It definitely is not a conventionally accepted approach in the Present State of Physics. :-) jrc

Thank you John, your idea makes more sense to me now. I like it.

An interference pattern affected result is not produced from a single slit. Yet a particle can not be detected taking two slits, always one.

Double slit experiment: Current physics-maths shows the 'particle superposition' taking both paths. That's okay if its only representing not knowing which path. However it is used to claim matter is wavelike (and all that follows from that.)

With the premises 1. there is a local environment (base existence) surrounding and in contact with actualized matter particles and waves even in a vacuum 2. The actualized entity has an effect on the base existence, that may be called a field. The field can pass through both slits undetected and interfere but the measurable particle itself always takes one slit. The field is easily divided but the particle stays together. The effect of encountering the field interference can happen for small matter particles because relative size of the field disturbance compared to size of particle. Allowing retention of classical notions of matter, while fitting with the experiments results.

A raw egg is the only analogy springing to mind. I can imagine pouring it over two slits in a baking tray, over a sink. The white is the runny, less gelatinous kind . It easily slips through both slits. The yolk unbroken takes just one of the, bit smaller than flattened yolk diameter, slits.

The yolk represents the detectable particle. The white represents the surrounding undetectable, base existence, environment that ha been affected by the presence of the particle...the particle's field.

This doesn't need 'Many worlds'. Doesn't need giving up on classical ideas of matter. Does need the previously assumed superposition to be a not knowing if a path is taken by particle OR effect of particle in single particle double slit, and delayed choice experiments; And evaluation of when that kind of scenario is relevant in other circumstances.

Georgi,

The egg separator is a good illustration ! Actually, I have an early plastic one in my utensil drawer that was an ad gimme from a local family operated hatchery years ago (and a tip of the hat to Wade and Helen). But seriously, yes, the conventional QM interpretation holds that the field effects are 'associated' with a particle however ill defined, rather than the field view of the fields being inherent energy extending beyond the 'hard' particle horizon. Given the amalgam of quantum fields enveloping atomic structure in the slit or polarizer element material those local environmental interactions with the passing photon/soliton would produce the classic 'leap-frog' EM field generations and the yolk could slip through one slit along with some of the albumen and the rest morph throw in recombinant fashion through the other. Lots of scenarios possible which would take a lot of critical examination, but yes, I like that analogy. jrc

John, thank you, I'm glad the analogy works.

My description of 'field' is of course very different from the 'particle field of QFT. That has the particle generated by the field, or rather what the existent field does. Whereas I have the particle as a particular type of concentration of existence, that acts upon base existence around it, forming a field (disturbance pattern); which can in turn affect what the particle does, as in the interference pattern guide scenario.

Physics has given us a fundamentally wrong view of the world, a male view of the world [1], a view of the world where every current aspect of climate change, and every future outcome of climate change was determined from the beginning of the world, and where people are just epiphenomena, i.e. people are not responsible for causing outcomes like flying planes into the twin towers.

Physics has looked at the experimental evidence and decided that it confirms its male biases about the nature of the world, if only they could get the mathematics just right. And all round the world millions of men are doggedly working on the mathematics of their special theories of the world, theories that all presuppose that every current aspect of climate change was determined from the beginning of the world, and that people are just epiphenomena, i.e. people are not responsible for causing outcomes like flying planes into the twin towers.

It's not a matter of tweaking the edges of the male theories of the world, or making the theories equally androcentric and gynocentric: physics has given us a fundamentally wrong and heavily biased view of the world, a view of the world born and developed in the minds of men over a period of hundreds if not thousands of years.

This primitive, male view of the world is that consciousness and agency are so extremely unimportant that they can be regarded as superficial appearances, epiphenomena resulting from the operation of the laws of nature. This primitive, male view of the world is that consciousness and agency are not fundamental and necessary aspects of the world.

1. Physics is more than 80% men, but until very recently, physics was almost all men.

Curvature if spacetime us not the cause of gravity. Despite the popularity of the idea and illustrations. Spacetime is a product not source reality. A curved mapping of results is not the cause of the curvature mapped. Relativity relates to what is observed. The spacetime visible universe is what is observed. EMr signals are curved, by the uni-temporal (Same time everywhere -Now) existent environment they travel through. That existent base existence environment getting more concentrated closer to the Earth or other massive body. From which cones the inverse square law. This way gravity can be understood as the result of thee effect of bodies of matter on base existence. And electric and magnetic forces the effect of charges or charged bodies on base existence.

. And electric and magnetic forces, are the effect of charges or charged bodies on base existence.

Unifying electromagnetic forces with curved spacetime won't work as that is trying to unite models ( inverse square law and vector field) reflecting the underlying Object reality with an Image reality product.

Are the foundations of the world doing high-level mathematics that only a human mathematician can do? Obviously not. But physicists, mathematicians and philosophers (approximately 80% men) believe that the foundations of the world ARE doing high-level mathematics!

What has been experimentally shown to exist at the foundations of the world are relationships, and "number jumping", which people symbolically represent by equations and the assignment of new numbers to variables respectively.

But this doesn't mean that the foundations of the world are doing high-level mathematics. What it DOES mean is that relationships between categories exist and that new number assignment relationships are continually being created (i.e. primitive agency). What it DOES mean is that the foundations of the world discern relationship (i.e. primitive consciousness).

Instead of the foundations of the world doing high-level mathematics, the foundations of the world discern relationship and create new relationships.

Curved Spacetime is given by Einstein as the underlying cause of gravity and the associated curvature of light. However he muddles existent things and observation products. An observer's reference frame is not actually a slice of the spacetime continuum but what is generated by the observer from EMr signals 'light 'that has been emitted or reflected from existing material objects. A Virtual spacetime product is generated. We know that from study of vision and visual systems and optics. Spacetime is not the underlying source reality. So curvature of spacetime can not be a cause. It can be a way of representing the product. ------Electromagnetic forces are due to effects actualized in the base existence. Representable as a vector field. There can not be a field hosted by nothingness. This is about underlying source reality. Hopefully I have made clear why it is categorically different from curved spacetime.

Physicists, mathematicians and philosophers visualise the people who flew planes onto the twin towers, and they see automata, epiphenomena of the laws of nature.

Physicists, mathematicians and philosophers look at their own children, laughing and playing in the sun, and they see automata, epiphenomena of the laws of nature.

Physics has absolutely no way of, and no possible pathway towards, crediting human beings and other living things as entities that have a genuine presence and a genuine effect on the world. Laughably, physics would only be looking for yet more equations and rules to box in and define the world as automata, epiphenomena of these rules.

But in fact the world is genuinely free: the children, adults and other living things are genuinely free entities; and the stale and stupid men [1] of physics, mathematics and philosophy are backing a losing horse.

What does it mean to be a free entity? It means that the entity (as opposed to the laws of nature) is genuinely assigning the numbers to its own variables, OBVIOUSLY in a non-lawful way, in response to the situations that the entity encounters. (More correctly, assigning numbers to variables is the way to SYMBOLICALLY REPRESENT the agency/ "free will" aspect of the world).

1. Physics is more than 80% men, but until very recently, physics was almost all men. It's pretty much the same for mathematics and philosophy.

More grandstanding and irrelevant sexism.

I wrote in my previous posts "Electromagnetic forces". That's incorrect use of terminology. Not what I intended to convey.

I should have " electric" ,electrostatic and "magnetic' effects on other particles or bodies' are due to effects actualized in the base existence. Each representable as a vector field.

Please excuse the weird punctuation. I should have checked before posting.

Getting interference from single photons in double slit expt. and from recombination of paths from half silvered mirrors seems to be showing that there is a source of interference that affects the paths the particle might take. It isn't necessary to assume the interference caused pattern of results is due to self interference. Rather it would seem to be another example of the effect of existent concentrations of existence, particles or bodies of matter, on base existence around them. Like the field effects of charged particles and gravity. They are not just disembodied numbers or vectors. These effects are showing something is affected even if not directly visible. Seen this way the double slit results are not strange; almost to be expected. They can be reconciled with classical physics. Single photon, half silvered mirrors recombination of paths results and singe particle double slit expt. results can be regarded as unextraordinary 'field effect' classical physics