New (To me) simple idea behind Quantum Double slit experiment

Recommended Posts

_______________________________________________________________________4th Spatial dimension interpretation

Look at this 4D Tesseract,

Quote

A tesseract is the four-dimensional equivalent of a three-dimensional cube. This one is rotating in four dimensions in the xw-plane. Since we cannot see four-dimensional objects as they really might be, a projection down to our three physical dimensions is necessary.

What do you see? Lots of 3D Cubic shapes

Now;

What do you see when you observe Two 3D Spherical Photons Or Electrons

An interference wave pattern of 2D Circles on the Screen behind the Slits

Before it was observed they were two regular bands of bombarded verticle lines

SO

Why do the Spheres turn into Circles over time?

Quote

Special Relativity. Velocity Addition: If observers in two different frames of reference (that are in motion relative to each other) are observing motion of the same object, they will both measure it to be traveling at different speeds.

What I'm about to type here is the basis of the idea;

___________________________________As the Observer changes what they see from verticle lines into interference wave pattern, they are manually manipulating the frame of reference of the 4D spatial dimension plane, thus the 3D spheres turn into 2D circles. Much like the Tesseract

Evidence for this idea;

Quantum and 4th spatial dimension have crossed paths before

Share on other sites

3 hours ago, HawkII said:

What do you see when you observe Two 3D Spherical Photons Or Electrons

Neither photons nor electrons are spherical.

Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Bufofrog said:

Neither photons nor electrons are spherical.

Baffling. Which shape are they then? (In Particle form)

Edit: I got it the wrong way round, when double slit experiment is observed, it creates two bands of Verticle lines (From what I understood to be 3D spheres). Idea still stands though. Especially the Special Relativity.

Edited by HawkII
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HawkII said:

Baffling. Which shape are they then? (In Particle form)

It really doesn't make any sense to say what shape are electrons or photons.  It also makes no sense to talk about a photons or an electrons in a particle form.

These are quantum objects and they cannot be described accurately using classical ideas.  Quantum objects are not part particle and part wave nor are they sometimes particles and sometimes waves, they are objects that have 'particle like' and 'wave like' attributes.

There is already a simple idea for the interference pattern from the double slit experiment.

Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bufofrog said:

It really doesn't make any sense to say what shape are electrons or photons.  It also makes no sense to talk about a photons or an electrons in a particle form.

These are quantum objects and they cannot be described accurately using classical ideas.  Quantum objects are not part particle and part wave nor are they sometimes particles and sometimes waves, they are objects that have 'particle like' and 'wave like' attributes.

There is already a simple idea for the interference pattern from the double slit experiment.

Which already existing simple idea is this?

Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, HawkII said:

Which already existing simple idea is this?

A single photon or electron passes through both slits and interferes with itself resulting in the interference pattern.

Share on other sites

9 hours ago, HawkII said:

Baffling. Which shape are they then? (In Particle form)

Fundamental particles like electrons tend to be points. But they also have a wave nature.

9 hours ago, HawkII said:

Edit: I got it the wrong way round, when double slit experiment is observed, it creates two bands of Verticle lines (From what I understood to be 3D spheres). Idea still stands though. Especially the Special Relativity.

The vertical lines are a result of the slits being vertical. If you have diffraction through a circular hole, you get a bright dot surrounded by concentric rings

Share on other sites

• 2 weeks later...

Evolving!

On 9/7/2023 at 8:08 PM, swansont said:

Fundamental particles like electrons tend to be points. But they also have a wave nature.

What if.... Quantum objects are 4D shapes. Electrons & Photons look like this for instance

On 9/7/2023 at 5:37 PM, Bufofrog said:

A single photon or electron passes through both slits and interferes with itself resulting in the interference pattern.

Sounds a bit too 'Nature abhors a vacuum' to me

In the 4th Spatial dimension, they cast 3D shadows, multiple light sources cast multiple shadows, so the 4D Sphere casts a 3D shadow, which casts multiple shadows

Edited by HawkII
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, HawkII said:

Sounds a bit too 'Nature abhors a vacuum' to me

I don't know what you mean by that comment.

11 minutes ago, HawkII said:

In the 4th Spatial dimension, they cast 3D shadows, multiple light sources cast multiple shadows, so the 4D Sphere casts a 3D shadow, which casts multiple shadows

I don't know what casting shadows in higher dimensions has to do with the double slit experiment.

Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:

I don't know what you mean by that comment.

It was an explanation for empty Beacons absorbing liquid. At the time they didn't know about Air pressure

17 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:

I don't know what casting shadows in higher dimensions has to do with the double slit experiment.

There are multiple verticle lines on the screen behind the slits. Thus many objects from one object.

(I don't know how this all works out myself yet, but we are working at this together)

Edited by HawkII
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, HawkII said:

What if.... Quantum objects are 4D shapes. Electrons & Photons look like this for instance

What experiment would confirm this?

41 minutes ago, HawkII said:

Sounds a bit too 'Nature abhors a vacuum' to me

But consistent with experiment. When photons or electrons are sent individually through a double-slit, you eventually get an interference pattern.

Share on other sites

3 hours ago, HawkII said:

It was an explanation for empty Beacons absorbing liquid. At the time they didn't know about Air pressure

I guess you are saying you don't like the explanation for the interference pattern.  I don't see any particular issue with the explanation.

3 hours ago, HawkII said:

There are multiple verticle lines on the screen behind the slits. Thus many objects from one object.

(I don't know how this all works out myself yet, but we are working at this together)

It would seem that a single particle would leave more than one spot on the screen if your idea was right but that doesn't happen.

Good luck working out your idea further

Share on other sites

20 hours ago, swansont said:

What experiment would confirm this?

But consistent with experiment. When photons or electrons are sent individually through a double-slit, you eventually get an interference pattern.

1. Exciting possibilities here Notice how that's Three differenet parts, the Hypersphere is made up of Three different parts in the previous uploaded diagram. (Alhough Electrons & Photons are one part) What's even more exciting is that Electron energy orbits around Protons and Neutrons (Uncharged Protons) Are to do with Prime Numbers. This could give clues to geometric data.
2. Nature abhors a vacuum was the then curent understanding for the consistent result.
17 hours ago, Bufofrog said:

I guess you are saying you don't like the explanation for the interference pattern.  I don't see any particular issue with the explanation.

Good luck working out your idea further

1. The current explanation is too mysterious.
2. This is team work, a joint effort
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HawkII said:
1. Exciting possibilities here Notice how that's Three differenet parts, the Hypersphere is made up of Three different parts in the previous uploaded diagram. (Alhough Electrons & Photons are one part) What's even more exciting is that Electron energy orbits around Protons and Neutrons (Uncharged Protons) Are to do with Prime Numbers. This could give clues to geometric data.

This is not an experiment

1 minute ago, HawkII said:
1. Nature abhors a vacuum was the then curent understanding for the consistent result.

That’s an aphorism, not actual physics, and applies to macroscopic systems. The concept of pressure from kinetic theory doesn’t work at the subatomic level.

1 minute ago, HawkII said:
1. The current explanation is too mysterious.

That speaks to your understanding, which carries no weight.

Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, HawkII said:

The current explanation is too mysterious.

It doesn't seem mysterious to me.

5 minutes ago, HawkII said:

This is team work, a joint effort

OK, good luck to you and your team.

Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bufofrog said:

It doesn't seem mysterious to me.

OK, good luck to you and your team.

1. Ok
2. This entire forum is the team
2 hours ago, swansont said:

This is not an experiment

That’s an aphorism, not actual physics, and applies to macroscopic systems. The concept of pressure from kinetic theory doesn’t work at the subatomic level.

That speaks to your understanding, which carries no weight.

1. I said possibilities for an experiment.
2. I didn't know about aphorisms, thank you. I know, but I guess it's good to be clear for when other people join in on this thread
3. An object interacting with itself when observed is a mystery.
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, HawkII said:

An object interacting with itself when observed is a mystery.

Not if you’ve learned some quantum mechanics

Share on other sites

9 hours ago, HawkII said:

This entire forum is the team

I don't want to be on the team, but thanks for the invite.

Share on other sites

I would like to rename this Thread to 'Quantum objects are Four-Dimensional space shapes' Please

I visualized 4D shapes

After having watched this video, I now see Photons and Electrons as 4D Torus Shapes. There are many Torus shapes to choose from. (So we the team need to hone in on which 4D Torus shapes are best suited)

You can now start to imagine an atom being 4D Hypersphere Protons and Neutrons, with 4D Torus Shaped Electrons hanging on around the extremities

Edited by HawkII
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HawkII said:

You can now start to imagine an atom being 4D Hypersphere Protons and Neutrons, with 4D Torus Shaped Electrons hanging on around the extremities

I think I'll stick with current thinking.

Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HawkII said:

After having watched this video, I now see Photons and Electrons as 4D Torus Shapes. There are many Torus shapes to choose from.

What problem does this solve, that isn't already addressed?

Share on other sites

In my head I've come up with a new interpretation for the Double slit experiment

When you don't observe the Photons/Electrons, it produces lower dimension cross sections of 4D Torus shapes

(Ditorus for example)

When you observe the Photons/Electrons, you see the 3D shadows that the 4D objects cast.

And there you have it. Job done.

(EDIT; I just realized that the 3D objects cross sectioning into Flat land would also cast shadows into Flat land)

Edited by HawkII
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HawkII said:

In my head I've come up with a new interpretation for the Double slit experiment

How do you get from this to the math of interference?

How do you test that this is the correct model?

Share on other sites

10 hours ago, swansont said:

What problem does this solve, that isn't already addressed?

Well none so far, it's simply an attempt at a better understanding. People think Quantum then immediately think of Mechanics or Physics afterwards. Thinking of it doing rather than being.

1 hour ago, swansont said:

How do you get from this to the math of interference?

How do you test that this is the correct model?

1. Me and the team will find and replace math of interference with 4D math equivalents
2. I suppose me and the team will come up with 4D shape explanations for all Quantum phenomena, that will persuade people that we have the correct model
Share on other sites

Can everyone who is on your team please stand up? I must have missed the invitation.