SINGLE EDGE CERTAINTY Copyright © Bill Alsept EDGE CERTAINTY Copyright © Bill Alsept ... wave...
Transcript of SINGLE EDGE CERTAINTY Copyright © Bill Alsept EDGE CERTAINTY Copyright © Bill Alsept ... wave...
SINGLE EDGE CERTAINTY Copyright © Bill Alsept
A PARTICLE THEORY OF LIGHT
May, June, July, Oct 2014
Abstract: The nature of light has been questioned for hundreds of years. Is it a wave, particle or
both? For those unwilling to except the non conclusive concept of duality this paper offers a clear and
simple particle based solution. Contrary to scientific consensus the fringe patterns from various slit or
edge experiments can conclusively prove that photons without diffraction or interference will produce the
fringe patterns we observe. Not only can patterns be constructed with straight line geometry but the ideas
behind Single Edge Certainty will do away with the approximations, assumptions and uncertainty of the
wave theory.
This is a work in progress.
Introduction: The debate over the nature of light and matter goes back to the 17th century when
Isaac Newton and Christian Huygens offered conflicting theories. Newton proposed that light was made
of particles while Huygens's theory consisted of waves.
For 350 years these competing theories have continued to develop as new experiments confirmed new
ideas. Scientist such as Young, Planck, Einstein and many others have worked to compile the current
scientific theory that all particles have a wave nature. In other words a wave particle duality.
I never gave it much thought and until recently had never even considered the double slit experiment.
As you know there is a light source directed toward two narrow slits and a fringe pattern forms on a
distant screen. The fringe pattern is made of equally spaced bright and dark fringes and the phenomenon
has intrigued many for centuries.
Often this concept is diagramed with overlapping semicircles representing waves as in figure 1 below
Figure 1
A wave theory is explained with sets of waves overlapping to form constructive and deconstructive
interference. This got me to thinking about the wave theory in general. You can hardly find descriptions
of light that do not include analogies of water or sound when describing waves. I can understand how
water or sound forms waves because there are multiple forces involved. With water there is the initial
force pushing on a medium of water molecules. A wave crest forms as the displacement meets resistance
and gravity pushes down on the crest countering the whole effect. There wouldn't even be a wave without
gravity or any one of the other forces. As for sound waves they too have multiple forces including
momentum, pressure and density differences.
Light doesn’t have any of these countering forces. The wave theory of light doesn’t even offer an
explanation of these forces or a cause for the so called wave. The only descriptions given are Huygens
and the uncertainty principle but again nothing to explain the forces. What bothers me the most about the
wave theory of light is that most interpretations claim that only waves can explain the fringe patterns. I
believe on the contrary that light is made up of particles and it's these same experiments that will prove it.
With certainty
PHOTONS
When it comes to a particle theory of light we have the photon. Photons are very small individual
packets of energy each with a certain frequency and traveling close to 300,000 kilometers per second.
Photons oscillate electromagnetically between positive and negative amplitudes. Most importantly
photons can be counted individually as particles.
How photons oscillate is not exactly clear and could involve cycles of spinning, inflating, collapsing or
all the above. Whatever their doing they do it a lot and the term wavelength is used as a convenient unit of
measurement. In reality it's the frequency that we need to be concerned with.
A photon with a 500 nanometer wavelength actually oscillates at an extreme frequency of about 600
terahertz. That’s 600,000,000,000,000 (600 trillion) oscillations per second! In a typical slit experiment a
photon may travel one meter or 1,000,000,000 nanometers and during that short distance and time a
photon will oscillate 2,000,000 times. Now if you divide the meter (L) by the number of oscillations you
will get a very small distance of 500 nanometers. (1,000,000,000/2,000,000=500) 500λ is the distance a
photon travels during one cycle and we call it a wavelength but really it has nothing to do with waves.
Imagine a single 500nmλ photon traveling along at 300,000 kilometers per second in a straight line. As
the photon travels it oscillates through full cycles of positive and negative amplitudes every 500
nanometers. The image below represents a photon traveling left to right as it oscillates through to a
positive amplitude at 250 nanometers and then a negative amplitude after another 250 nanometers. See
figure 2
Figure 2 Photon cycle and propagation
For now it doesn’t matter how photons oscillates, just remember it’s something each photon does
locally as it travels along and has nothing to do with waves. For instance if you throw a Frisbee at 20
meters per second with a spin of 20 revolutions per second the Frisbee would complete one oscillation
per meter. It does not mean that the Frisbee has wavelength of one meter (λ1m). The term wavelength is
only used as a convenience but there are no waves involved.
We may not know everything about photons but we do know they electromagnetically oscillate at
different frequencies and travel in straight lines close to 300,000 kilometers per second. We also know
that photons are emitted and absorbed individually by atoms. This is all the information I need to prove
that light as a particle (individual photons) can account for the so called interference patterns. Step by step
I will show how the fringe patterns we observe can be constructed mechanically and mathematically with
straight line particle trajectories. When it comes to light there is no need for waves or diffraction.
As I was saying photons are emitted and absorbed individually, they travel in straight lines and oscillate
between positive and negative amplitudes. If a visible photon is randomly emitted toward an opaque wall
it will travel in a straight line until it impacts an atom on that wall. The photons energy will be absorbed
or the photon will be absorbed and then followed by a new photon being emitted in a new and random
direction from that spot. Figure 3 below shows examples of either.
Figure 3
If the wall has a small slit then a very small portion of the photons will miss the wall altogether and will
continue on their straight trajectories through the slit unaffected. See Fig 4 below. So far there has been
no need for waves or bending of light but now we come to the interesting part.
Figure 4 Figure 5
Sometimes a photons will impact right on the edge of a slit and something very different happens.
Again the photons are absorbed but this time when new ones are emitted they have a wider range of
emission trajectories. New photons are randomly emitted (in straight trajectories) from this new point
source and this time some of them will travel toward the other side of the wall. See figure 5 above
The sharper the edge the better this point source becomes and all photons coming from this point are
coherent. It may appear as though these photons trajectories are bending around the edge but as you can
see no waves or diffraction are required because there are two different photons involved. Next I will
piece together exactly how a particle theory of light can form the fringe patterns or the so called
interference and diffraction patterns we observe.
THE SINGLE EDGE
The most popular experiment is the double slit experiment. Obviously it’s made of two single slits but
lets take a closer look and start with the left side of the left slits and we will call it Edge 1. See figure 6
Figure 6 Figure 7
In figure 7 we have a light source and for future reference it will be 500nmλ and monochromatic. We
have a single edge which I have labeled Edge 1 and one meter (L) above the edge there is a detection
screen. From the light source photons are randomly emitted with some traveling toward the edge and
detection screen. One half of the photons will hit the wall and edge while the other half will go on to the
detection screen.
As you can see the left side of the detection screen is a shadow because the photons are blocked from
getting there. The right side is illuminated with a fringe pattern and if you look closely you will see that
the pattern is not the same as a slit fringe pattern. The spacing’s are not equal and the farther away from
the shadows edge the smaller the spacing’s are. This diminishing pattern continues until it blurs and is
typical of all single edge fringe patterns.
The fringe pattern will stay the same as long as L, λ and the angle of the screen remains square to the
closest point of the straight edge. If you move the location of the light source the shadows edge will move
but the actual fringe pattern stays in place. See figure 8 and 9 below
Figure 8 Figure 9
Single edge fringe patterns are important to any theory of light. These patterns are always there and are
the bases of all other fringe patterns. In the next few pages I will show how these patterns are constructed
with photon particles, straight lines and basic geometry. There is no bending of light or interference
needed to create them.
So getting back to the single edge as I was saying in figure 5 and 7 some photons will be absorbed
right on the edge causing new photons to be emitted from there. All the photons emitted from here are
coherent and will travel straight line trajectories in every direction. These photons will eventually impact
every single point on the detection screen that isn’t blocked.
As a photon travels from the edge to somewhere on the screen it oscillates between negative and
positive amplitudes. See Fig 3. Depending on where a photon impacts the screen it may be at a positive or
negative amplitude. In reality most photons will impact somewhere between amplitudes. See fig-10 below
Figure 10
In this experiment the distance from the edge to the detection screen (L) is 1,000,000,000nm. A 500λ
photon will oscillate between positive and negative amplitudes 2,000,000 times while traveling to the
detection screen. Whether a photon impacts in a negative or positive amplitude depends on its frequency,
the length it travels, and the phase of the amplitude cycle it was emitted at. We can then use Pythagoreans
theorem to calculate the locations of individual fringes such as (B1) the first bright spot, (D1) the first
dark spot or (B2), (D2), (B3) etc. See Fig-11
Figure 11
Fig- 11 above shows how the bright and dark Y distances are calculated but as I was saying we still
need to know at what phase of the cycle the photon was emitted. I may have found the answer to this.
The first time I calculated the distance (Y) (measured from the shadows edge) to the 1st bright fringe
(B1). I tried adding ½ λ (250nm) to L to create a hypotenuse and then I calculated:
Y= or
Y= or
Y=707,106.82nm But turned out to be incorrect.
At first I had nothing to compare my calculation with, The only equations I could find for single edge
fringe patterns where extremely complicated. One day I came across this site about lunar occultation’s
http://spiff.rit.edu/richmond/occult/bessel/bessel.html and discovered another way to look at single edge
fringe patterns.
This was the first time I had read about occultation. By chance I happened to recognize a sequence of
numbers that were similar to the calculations I was doing for single edge fringe patterns and realized I
was on the right track. Based On what I had learned about lunar occultation I could now calculate the
diminishing spacing’s of the fringes the moon would make on the earth. The creator of this web site had
already measured these distances so I finally had something to compare with my calculations. For my
experiment all I had to do was convert (L) back to 1 meter instead of the 184,000 kilometers their
experiment had used for the distance to the moon’s edge.
Using Pythagorean Theorem and calculating backwards I converted the occultation’s measurements for
Y and L and applied to them to my experiment and then calculated for the hypotenuse. What I discovered
was that no matter what wavelength of light or distance you input (when calculating for the 1st bright
fringe B1) the hypotenuse will always be L+3/4*1/2λ or L+3/8λ. Not quite 1/2λ
This told me that these photons (maybe all photons) were emitted at the same point of their
electromagnetic cycle. This also told me that at the point of emission the photons were already part way
into their cycles or more precisely 1/8 beyond their negative amplitude. That's why 3/8λ is added to (L) so
that the first hypotenuse is the exact length needed to complete an oscillation just as it’s impacting the
screen in a positive amplitude. The distance Y from the shadows edge to the first bright fringe is
calculated as:
Y= or
Y= or
Y= or
Y=612372.46nm
See Fig 12 below
Figure 12
Note: On the calculation I have highlighted what will be the variable for calculating other fringe locations.
Only with the first bright fringe do I add 3/8λ to (L) to create the hypotenuse but after that to calculate
all the other negative and positive fringe amplitudes all we need to do is add 1/2λ to the previous
hypotenuse.
The 2nd fringe is a dark spot (D1) to calculate it I would add 1/2λ (250nm) to the previous hypotenuse
Y=
So it would now look like:
Y= or
Y= or
Y=935,414.45 nm distance to (D1)
See Fig 13 below
Figure 13
Every other bright or dark fringe can be confirmed at any Y distance no matter how far out you
calculate. As you can see there are no waves or diffraction involved. All that is needed are oscillating
photons and straight line Pythagorean geometry.
If we continue on the 3rd
fringe (B2) will again be bright and is calculated as follows:
Y= or
Y= 1172604.142nm distance to (B2)
See Fig 14 below
Figure 14 Second bright fringe B2
The 4th fringe (D2) is dark and calculated as follows:
Y= or
Y= 1541103.958nm distance to (D2) See Fig 15 below
Figure 15 Second dark fringe D2
The 5th fringe (B3) is bright and calculated as follows:
Y= or
Y= 1695583.105nm distance to (B3) See Fig 16 below
Figure 16 The third bright fringe
In the same way I calculated the first five bright and dark fringes every other fringe can be calculated.
You can infinitely calculate for the Y distance and the measurements will always be accurate no matter
how far out you go.
THE FLIP SIDE
On the shadow side of the screen the same thing is happening. It may not be bright enough to see but
the photons emitted from the sharp edge are also randomly forming the same pattern that we see on the
illuminated side. The same Pythagorean principle applies in reverse order on the shadow side. See Fig 17
Figure 17 Figure 18
So far I have diagramed these single edges using a left edge. If we use a right edge the same fringe
pattern will form in the same way but with the shadow and illuminated sides reversed. Notice that the
fringe pattern stays the same and unmoving even though the shadow switched sides. See Fig 18 above
If a sharp edge did not have this effect there would only be a shadow side and an illuminated side with
no fringe pattern at all. See Fig 19
Figure 19
Coherent photons radiate in random directions from the edge impacting the screen at every location.
Some hit the shadow side and some hit the already illuminated side. The positive and negative impacts of
the photons from the edge mix with the screen and form the single edge fringe patterns described above.
See Fig 10, 17 and 18
On the shadow side the oscillating photons add or subtract from the screen depending on what phase
they are in when they impact. Negative impacts subtract from the already dark and empty field so the
location remains dark. Positive impacts add a small amount to the empty field. Other than the first bright
fringes the pattern on the shadow side would not be noticed but maybe it could be detected. It would be
interesting to see if that has ever been tested before. (Maybe it has in an occultation experiment?)
On the illuminated side the oscillating photons also add or subtract to the screen depending on their
impact phase. Negative impacts subtract locally from the already illuminated side making it darker than
average at those points. Positive impacts add to the already illuminated side making it brighter than
average at those points. A unequal pattern forms of darker than average and lighter than average fringes.
The energy delivered by each photon varies from a positive amplitude to a negative amplitude with
most impacts somewhere in between. Impacts subtract or add to the local energy and this process
combined with the Pythagorean geometry described above gives us the single edge fringe pattern and its
distinct diminishing spacing’s.
As you can see there is no need for waves, diffraction, spreading or bending in anyway. There are no
other explanation that even comes close to describing and accounting for the single edge fringe pattern as
accurately as this. The math and geometry perfectly predicts the fringe locations at any point.
Based on the principle of Occam’s razor my solution to the single edge fringe pattern not only has the
least assumptions but has no assumptions. Unlike the wave theory which relies on many assumptions,
approximations, infinite wavelets and a principle called uncertainty.
SINGLE EDGE CERTAINTY
Now let’s make things more interesting and slowly bring the left and right edges closer together
keeping the screen beyond at the same distance (L). As the left and right edges move parallel to the screen
their constant (unbending) fringe patterns on the screen remain intact as they move along in the same
direction. See Fig.20 a, b, c
Figure 20 a,b,c
The single edge fringe patterns are always there even as the two edges come closer and form what we
call a slit. The two single edge fringe patterns begin to overlap and form a new pattern where the photon
impacts add up to new totals at these local points along the screen. This new pattern has equal spacing’s
as do all slit fringe patterns.
At first all that is noticed is the light going through the slit with no obvious fringe patterns. In Fig 20
this area is labeled as Illuminated. Eventually the two single edge patterns overlap enough for the new
equally spaced single slit pattern to be revealed. See Fig 21 a,b,c
Figure 21 a,b,c
Every point on the new and equally spaced fringe pattern can be accounted for with the simple math and
geometry of overlapping and combining of the two single edge patterns. Everything is still based on
straight line Pythagorean geometry. There is no diffraction or interference.
As we slowly bring the two edges even closer together the pattern on the screen appears to be spreading
but it’s not. You can still do the math of combining the two original patterns (which are still there). The
combination of adding the two overlapping patterns changes the spacing’s of the pattern. As the spacing’s
get bigger the pattern spreads out. This gives the appearance that light is diffracting around the edge. See
Fig-21 b,c above
Now at this point the “UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLE” would tell us that because the two edges are
getting so close together the locations of the photons passing through this narrow area are becoming
more and more certain. It also says that after passing through a slit that the momentum of the photon
should become less certain for no reason at all other than to satisfy the statement “We can’t know the
location and the momentum at the same time” or something like that. What kind of reasoning is that??
As I described above the pattern can be accounted for by the overlaying (adding and subtracting) of the
two single edge patterns. The single edge patterns can be accounted for with straight line Pythagorean
geometry. Still no waves, diffraction, spreading, bending or wave interference. Why have an Uncertainty
Principle when we can have “Single Edge Certainty”
I have read that the uncertainty principle was meant for particles like electrons and not to be used for
photons. That may be so but there are a many sites that claim photons are affected this way so it is no
wonder there would be confusion about this. But why have an uncertainty principle at all. Why is it that
something needs to become more uncertain just because something else become more certain? Why have
uncertainty when it can be explained physically and mathematically with proven photon physics, simple
math and Pythagorean geometry.
Our experiment is still set up with λ =500nm and (L)=1,000,000,000nm. When the two edges come to
within 1,000,000nm of each other the equally spaced fringe pattern can be calculated to have 500,000nm
spacing’s. Again this can be proven with straight line Pythagorean geometry from the edges. There is no
need for waves, interference or assumptions and approximations of Huygens Principle.
Now place the two edges 900,000nm apart. The math (without assumptions) will show a fringe pattern
with spacing’s of 555555nm apart. An 800,000nm slit has spacing’s of 625,000nm apart and a 700,000nm
slit has spacing’s of 714,285nm apart. A 600,000nm slit has spacing’s of 833333nm apart and when the
slit is only 500,000nm apart the fringes are equally spaced at 1,000,000nm apart.
As the slit gets smaller the overlapping of the two single edge patterns keeps forming patterns with
larger and larger spacing’s. This gives the appearance that light is spreading or diffracting but everything
can be accounted for with the straight line geometry of single edges and oscillating photons.
Why is it that principles like Heisenberg’s or Huygens are excepted so easily to explain this so called
spreading when it can be proven so easily with the geometry of the two single edge patterns being
overlaid.
A PARTICLE SIMULATOR Copyright © Bill Alsept
When I first started drawing single edge fringe patterns to scale I would actually pencil them out with a
ruler and a lot of calculating. Eventually I started diagramming them as triangle waves (even though they
are not waves). This way I could place all the positive amplitudes at one end of the chart (top) and all the
negative amplitudes at the other end (bottom) with the Y distances (spacing’s) consistently getting smaller
along the horizontal. Fig 22 below shows the difference between a real single edge fringe patterns and the
way I charted them with triangle waves.
Figure 22
++
Charting the diminishing spacing’s of a single edge pattern is not the same nor as easy as charting a
repeating sine wave pattern. And charting two edges in both directions would get even more complicated.
See Fig 23
Figure 23
Although single edge fringe patterns are produced on both sides of an edge for clarity I only charted the
right sides. This also made it easier to accurately overlay and draw two patterns with a certain separation.
See Fig 25 below
Figure 25
At first I tried many wavelengths and distances but couldn’t get an obvious pattern to form. After
setting up a laser and viewing actual fringe patterns I realized that the single edge fringes were far more
numerous than the slit fringes. I would need to calculate and draw these patterns a lot farther out to even
begin to calculate the overlap. I couldn’t draw that many so I looked for a program.
I knew that Excel could chart equally spaced patterns but could not find anything about diminishing
patterns. I soon learned enough about Excel to realize it was the perfect tool for doing this. Maybe
someone somewhere has calculated these unique patterns with a program like Excel but I couldn’t find it.
I found some examples where standing waves or constant sine wave were charted but not the diminishing
spacing’s of a single edge fringe pattern.
It turned out to be much easier than I thought and I am still surprised no one had done it before. Not
only could excel accurately chart the patterns but it could do all the calculation as I did on pages seven
through twelve above. In addition to that I could separate each edge (edge 1, 2, 3, 4 …) into separate
columns with each being calculated as far out as I wanted to go. Fig 26 and 27 show screen shots from
my simulator.
Figure 26 Single Edge Pattern
Figure 27 Single Slit Pattern (two Edges)
With my simulator I could calculate and simulate single edge fringes as well as single, double and
multiple slit fringes. This was really cool and you will see it below. You can input any wavelength,
distances or number of slits and not only compare fringe patterns but see exactly how the convolution
forms the exact patterns we observe in nature. See Fig 28 below shows my 4 slit simulator and you can
see where all 8 edges come together at 5,000,000nm.
Figure 28 Screen shot of 4 slit (8 edges) simulator showing the calculations and charting of eight edges.
This simulator is set to calculate out to 2000 points along the horizontal. It’s really amazing when you
scroll fast across a pattern and see it move. After a few days of studying these fringes you’ll begin to see
why there are differences in the many types slit patterns.
Below are five versions of my simulator. Ctrl + Click one version then download
for simulator to work. Copyright © Bill Alsept
Single Edge Pattern Simulator (one edge)
Single Slit Pattern Simulator (two edges)
Double Slit Pattern Simulator (four edge)
Triple Slit Pattern Simulator (six edge)
Four Slit Pattern Simulator (eight edge)
ELECTRON SLIT EXPERIMENT WITHOUT UNCERTAINTY
Many double slit experiments use electrons as a source instead of photons. Richard Feynman
popularized this experiment in his lectures. For a clear and simple description of this process see link.
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2013/mar/14/feynmans-double-slit-experiment-gets-a-
makeover
The experiment and results are nicely described but as usual the reason the electrons do what they do is
not. The results are similar to the pattern that overlapping water waves would make but as I described in
Fig-1 not quite the same. Interfering water waves form a fringe pattern with spacing’s that are not equal
but the fringe patterns formed by electrons have equal spacing’s. Still the wave theory and the uncertainty
principle are the only solution ever offered.
As I developed Single Edge Certainty I wondered about electrons and the phenomenon they displayed
when fired through a slit experiment. The electrons appear to be going through both slits and interfering
with themselves to form a pattern on the screen. Electrons unlike photons are not absorbed or emitted by
atoms. How then could they form the same fringe patterns?
Many articles make a big deal of this by turning it into some mystic impossibility of the quantum world.
I still find articles that imply that the system seems to be consciously altering the paths of the electrons
just because of our observation and perception. They never mention that the detector actually blocks or
diverts the path of the electron so that it can no longer effect the pattern. “The nature of reality being
dictated by our perception is a product of pseudoscience with no actual evidence. Experiments claiming to
support this notion have been debunked many times.” Taken from my notes of a forgotten source.
Other than self interfering or self aware electrons the general consensus seems to be that the patterns
formed by the electrons are dictated by the uncertainty principle which I’m not ready to except. The more
I thought about it the more I focused on photons and the way they interacted with electrons. I knew that
accelerated electrons emitted photons and I knew about the photoelectric effect.
If an electron is accelerated wouldn’t it emit photons as it traveled along and if fired through a slit
would the same single edge fringe patterns form from the edges as I described above? Using my
simulator I pictured an electron passing through a slit and randomly emitting photons in every direction.
Some photons going forward toward the screen and some back toward the wall and the two edges. See
Fig-29
+
Figure 29
Eventually the space between the two walls would be filled with the reflecting photons but the paths
between the edges and the amplitude points on the screen (the single edge fringe patterns) would still
form. You can clearly see where the paths and amplitudes of individual photons are concentrated or
diffused. See Fig-30
Figure 30
These concentrations form links between the edges and amplitude points. As the electron continues on
toward the screen it gets bumped left and right by the photoelectric effect of these concentrations. The
closer the electron gets to the screen the more it is corralled into the same locations of the photon pattern.
Again giving us the appearance of a so called wave pattern.
With Single Edge Certainty I have already described how photons can account for the fringe patterns
we observe. Now with the accelerated electrons, photons and the photoelectric effect we also have an
alternate solution for the electron fringe pattern. Although it does appear as if electrons are going through
some sort of wave interference or wave process in reality they are just following random paths of
probabilities as they get bumped around by the concentration and phasing at the photon paths. The
probabilities are similar to but not the same as a plinko board. See Fig-31 and 32
Figure 31 Figure 32
This is a work in progress by Bill Alsept [email protected]
References Cited (in this document) Michael Richmond, “Diffraction effects during a lunar occultation”
Dept. of physics, Rochester Institute of Technology http://spiff.rit.edu/richmond/occult/bessel/bessel.html
Roger G Tobin “Wave Simulator” Fig-1a and link
Professor of physics Tuft University http://rtobin.phy.tufts.edu/Apps/interference.html
Fig-1 “Wave diagram” from “The Physics Classroom” taken from a list of images
http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/light/Lesson-3/Young-s-Equation
Fig-31 “Image of Plinko board” http://teachingcollegemath.com/category/mathstats/
Physicworld.com http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2013/mar/14/feynmans-double-slit-
experiment-gets-a-makeover