The Illusion of the Double Slit Experiment(s) - Plural

verbz (46)in #quantum • 4 days ago

When I first heard about the double slit experiment, I originally thought it was about sleeping with two women. Imagine my surprise when I discovered optics and quantum theory. It turns out, nerds all around the world are talking about shining light through some holes in a wall. But hey... at least my original experiments weren't totally in vain.

The Double Slit Experiment is one of the most widely used examples to substantiate Quantum Theory and the notion of a particle-wave duality. But the explanations and depictions seen in cartoons and text books are fallacies, and in some cases, straight up propaganda and lies. It's either gross negligence, or purposeful deception. At what point does an "oversimplification" just become erroneous or fraud?

There are four different experiments for the double slit scenarios and each individual experiment yields completely different results that have nothing to do with each other. There is no particle-wave duality. It's illusions of observation topped with ad hoc assumptions from group-think. Nepotism of thought for 100 years. Only people who agree are allowed to chime in.
Well... I disagree... greatly.

There are 16 possible combinations of outcomes for the double slit experiments, and none of them depend on a particle-wave duality.
None of the scenarios produce a literal mass to energy interchange, or vice versa.

There is no real-world observer in the experiment at all like how cartoons and textbooks depict. There is no human looking at the experiment and flipping the patterns from observation. There is no observer effect in that regard. There is no delayed choice. I reject the interpretation of the "quantum eraser" experiment in total. People conflate the results from the four different experiments as if they come from the same apparatus. They interject subjective opinions on the empirical evidence and make claims that a given apparatus isn't even capable of producing.

If there are four variables… 4 different experiments… then there are 16 combinations between them. (if not repeating combinations.)
AB is the same as BA.

So if there are non-repeating combinations using four variables… then there are 16 combinations between them. (Actually there are 15 real world combinations. The 16th is not performing the experiment at all. The absence of all variables.) But here is a list for the experiments and their possible combinations.

No variables present:
• none
One variable present:
• A
• B
• C
• D
Two variables present:
• A, B
• A, C
• A, D
• B, C
• B, D
• C, D
Three variables present:
• A, B, C
• A, B, D
• A, C, D
• B, C, D
All four variables present:
• A, B, C, D

A = spherical wavefront of light
B = plane wavefront of light
C = spherical wavefront of particles
D = plane wavefront of particles

A is produced by shining a flashlight through two slits.
It produces two bands on the wall.

B is produced by blocking the path of a laserbeam with two small slits. The two slits have to fit within the diameter of the laser beam. You block the sunlight with a sheet and poke a pinhole through the sheet, allowing the sunlight to come through the pinhole. The two slits have to sit within the diameter of the beam of light through the pinhole.
It produces an interference pattern on the wall.

In a third, completely unrelated experiment, result C is produced by using a glowing red hot filament which shoots off electron particles wildly from the atoms making up the filament. (Thermionic heat souce).
It produces two bands of individual particle impacts on a photo detector screen over time. This is the "shooting marbles from a cannon" analogy. A spherical wavefront of particles produces 2 bands of impacts over time. This experiment is conducted inside of a black box on a table top. Way too small for the naked eye to see.

What does experiment C have to do with experiment A or B so far?
Nothing!

In a fourth completely different experiment, D is produced by wrapping a coil of wire around the red hot filament and connecting it to a high voltage power source to produce a magnetic lens. The magnetic field of the coil guides those wildly shooting negatively charged electrons into a collimated beam. The two slits have to be small enough to fit within the 100 nm diameter beam. It produces an interference pattern of individual electron impacts on a photo detector screen over time.

But in addition to that, they have what I call a "mini-geiger counter" (mgc), which blocks one of the slits remotely, and it produces clicks on a detector. Every click on the detector means an electron did not make it to the wall to produce the interference pattern. They take the chart of the clicks and the chart of the impacts on the actual photo detector screen and overlay them after the experiment D is done. Then they claim victory for a particle-wave duality... after changing the parameters of the experiment from the double slit experiment to the single slit experiment.

It is not all the same electrons from the beam making it to the photo detector screen! The wall with the slits in it is made of atoms. Those atoms have electrons. The sharp edges of the slits are impacted by the primary electrons from the coherent beam... and like a Newton's cradle... a brand-new secondary electron is ejected from the edge of the slit itself which then flys off at a particular angle to produce the interference pattern over time. According to the coherent wave function and distribution statistically over time. Some of the electron particles make it through the window of the slit undisturbed. But others impact the edges of the slits to produce secondary electron emissions.

Double Slit Visualizations by Dr. Edward Dowdye:
https://rumble.com/v2datx2-dr-edward-dowdye-double-slit-re-emission-explanation.html

NOT that the electrons "choose" which window to go through depending if you look or not. Absolute absurd lunacy. There is no delayed choice. The entire interpretation of the scenario is a fallacy. What I call "quantum quackery".

At what point does an "oversimplification" just become a flat out lie and fraud? People are allowed to continue to believe a mythical flipping of particles and waves, or that mass is bundles of energy beyond the Planck scale... or that observation manifests reality. It's junk psyence, all based from relativity insisting the speed of light is the same to everyone no matter what. So they invented space-time and QED.

Challenges to Relativity:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1901318050428948870?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

Indoctrination versus Education:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1900300854537928791?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

You can combine experiment A with experiment B to produce two bands of light on the wall and an interference pattern of light on the wall simultaneously. You can turn off the power for experiment A and experiment B at will to switch between two bands or an interference pattern. Don't even have to look away.

You can combine experiment A with experiment C to produce two bands of light on a wall with two bands of particle impacts on a photo detector screen.
You could switch them on and off and have either scenario at will.

You can combine experiment A with experiment D to produce two bands of light on a wall with an interference pattern of particles on a photo detector screen.

You can combine experiment A with B AND C... or A, B AND D
etc etc.

Most people think there is ONE or two experiments that flip-flops its results whether you look or not. Complete fabrications and nonsense. Doesn't happen.

There are FOUR completely different experiments which produce FOUR completely different results that have nothing to do with each other.
There are 16 different combinations of experiments with the four different variables.

No one in the world has ever combined the experiments that I know of. No one has an apparatus that can have all four experiments at the same time and switch between results at will. But it's possible, and would expose an untenable illusion of the "empirical evidence" for the experiments. But what people do with the "quantum eraser" or "delayed choice" claims is they mix and match the A B C D results from the four different scenarios, and they make claims for the apparatus that it isn't even capable of producing. People do that out of habit, gross negligence, or parroting like some zombie NPC.

I detail all of the experiments and their results in my Book 1 on LIGHT.
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1969454133636972569?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

I also provide modifications to Maxwell/Heaviside's equations, Dirac's equations, Heisenberg and Schrödinger equations. Since most all those guys derived their equations under the false assumption that the velocity of light is invariant or that the solution to those equations require a constancy in all frames of reference. They do not. That assumption is only under invariant models for the velocity of light. (And that's all the world knows or believes in!)

Doppler Effect Misnomer 2:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/2016227860886032837?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

Doppler Effect Misnomer 3:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/2018196525017714953?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

People think there’s just one scenario flipping back and forth because “experts” implied so in erroneous documentaries like What the Bleep Do We Know, Flatland or Down the Rabbit Hole.
Another aspect of the double slit experiment is the laser light.

Everyone knows laser light is coherent. An isolated wavelength in a collimated beam. That coherent light produces a plane wavefront.

But... that plane wavefront is in regard to the actual beam itself. However, I discovered a technicality. If you shine the coherent beam at a white surface, the re-emission/glow/reflection will produce a spherical wavefront.

So, even though the light produced by the laser is coherent... and coherent light produces a plane wavefront... I'm still able to make just 2 bands on the wall with the coherent light.

How?
Because the secondary glow from the re-emitted laser light is a brand new light propagating relative to the white background. And that produces spherical wavefronts. You only get the interference pattern with a plane wavefront and/or if the 2 slits are sitting within the diameter of the beam.

Even though sunlight is incoherent... and incoherent light produces spherical wavefronts... you can still make a plane wavefront out of sunlight by blocking that light with a black sheet at the window. Then poking a hole in the sheet. Like Issac Newton. The conical beam of sunlight produces an interference pattern even though its incoherent light.

Newton says, "It's Disco Tiiime!"

There is incoherent light.
There is coherent light.
There are spherical wavefronts.
There are plane wavefronts.

There are incoherent spherical wavefronts.
There are coherent spherical wavefronts.
There are incoherent plane wavefronts.
There are coherent plane wavefronts.

So there are more combinations than just A, B, C and D.
But alas... the world currently seems to believe there are only 2 scenarios that flip their results by way of observation. By literally looking with your eyes is how it's depicted.

People believe the misnomers because of science fiction nonsense peddled by sanctimonious know-it-alls like Neil deGROSS Tyson or Dr. Michio KAKA. And when you question people on any discrepancies, they cop out and chalk it off as "quantum magic", as an oversimplification, or they claim, “the quantum realm is just too mysterious to comprehend.” And if you think you know it, you don’t... because it’s not knowable... yet it is knowable at the same time because of superposition... but only the “experts” can be in that super position to know it... even though they admit they don’t know what the fuck they’re talking about under the guise that no one can understand.

Then we have the people who slap the word “quantum” on the label of their products to garner more sales from suckers. Literal snake oil has more use than most all products claiming to have quantum effects (for only $19.95).

Challenging Neil Tyson and Bill Nye to a fight:
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1803834300997210519?s=20

Funny enough, even “King Jellybean” Erwin Schrödinger thought the Copenhagen interpretation was nonsense. Schrödiddler made up the whole “cat in the box” thought experiment as a joke to make fun of the absurdity of quantum theory. But the world still took it as valid or literal and now use that as justification for the laughable belief that “all things are possible until you look.” Or even worse... that reality itself is subjective to each observer.

By that logic, burying your head in the sand will make all your problems go away. Or by that logic, the universe wouldn't exist to blind people.

Schrödinger also hated probability theory and was quoted in a June 13th, 1946, letter to Einstein saying, “God knows I am no friend of probability theory, I have hated it from the first moment when our dear friend Max Born gave it birth. For it could be seen how easy and simple it made everything, in principle, everything ironed and the true problems concealed. Everybody must jump on the bandwagon."

Erwin Shrodiddler loved kitties... but he loved kiddies even more...
Schrodinger and Dirac equations are space-time versions of the averaged energy relations.
https://arxiv.org/vc/quant-ph/papers/0607/0607001v1.pdf

But there is no space-time...
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1974985998749819334?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

The entire scientific community knew of Schrödinger indiscretions... but they covered it all up in order to idolize him. He was the Diddy/Epstein of Quantum Theory and wrote all about it in his own diaries.

(For those interested in scientific models that weren't invented or popularized by charlatans, pedophiles and incestuous plagiarists, you can scroll through my page for free.) Please scrutinize, harshly.

Proper Foundation of Light & Prisms
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1899879205774700771

There is no particle-wave duality.
Photons and gravitons are not particles whatsoever.

Gravity is not some mythical curvature of space-time.
Gravity is a force and an emission.

I take light and photons as being a pure wave packet. A photon is emitted as a consequence of a single electron dropping energy levels.

In my original model and heretical view, I take gravitons as being a pure wave packet. A graviton is emitted as a consequence of electron pairs decoupling and dropping energy levels.
A primary gravity is emitted by a source. And a secondary gravity is re-emitted by the electrons making up whatever absorbs the primary.

All the light you ever see is the re-emitted light from the electrons making up yourself. Likewise, all the gravity you ever feel is the re-emitted gravity from the electrons making up yourself.

The scientific community was futilely looking for graviton particles.
And the misnomer of the double slit experiments and misinterpretation of the results added the cherry on top of the confusion. So the concept of the fourth dimension was invented by Einstein. He renamed the 3D luminiferous ether medium as space-time. But there is no aether and there is no space-time.

Mass and energy does not literally interchange like how Einstein theorized.
Relativity/Lorentz invariance says
E = mc²
(Energy and mass are universally equivalent and literally interchangeable under All conditions.)

but Galilean variance says
E = Δmc² = mₒc²
(Energy changes in a system are the result from changes in mass. mₒ represents the original mass of the scenario. Mass and energy do not literally interchange. There is an equivalence, not an interchange.)

So why should anyone continue to listen to these freaks? Because... math? Ok... well now that we have Dr. Dowdye’s Extinction Shift Principle and a legitimate alternative under Galilean variance, what justification is there to continue with outdated models?

How far does a misrepresentation have to go to become an all-out lie or fabrication? 100 years of the world’s leading experts and universities, cartoons, diagrams, books and people showing you an incorrect model of the prism, light, darkness and color. People trust the same organizations who have failed them for decades. Whether it be science, politics, medicine, or any aspect of life really.

People are still allowed to think the double slit experiment(s) involve literal human observation but it doesn’t.

This can’t be. The gross negligence is too great to bear. It MUST be purposeful deception at this point. I’m having difficulty believing that generations of people can be this insane and never even ask relatively simple questions for that level of so-called “expertise.”

71 Part Video Series
(Each vid is 1 min - 1 and a half min)
Relativity vs Reality
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1766194798187475358

Nuclear theory and the model of the atom needs an overhaul.
Dr. Paul Brown's Resonant Nuclear Battery:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/2014975137117044876?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

I like this relatively recent publication on the Structured Atom Model called The Nature of the Atom. Published by Curtis-press.
https://structuredatom.org

Some more information and credible challenges to the nuclear model of the atom comes from Dewey B Larson and his Reciprocal Systems Theory. Specifically his book titled, "The Case Against the Nuclear Atom."
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_01ueS0Y28YOUM1RV90VmZBWlk/view?usp=sharing&resourcekey=0-B2GaxpRGBtCD99RUgua4tw

And another man named Pier Luigi Ighina had unique perspectives on the model of the atom. He called "The Magnetic Atom."
He said electrons are more like an atomic glue and there are inner electrons as well as out electrons. That aligns with the Structured Atom Model. http://rexresearch.com/ighina/ighina.htm

And then we have the dissenting opinions of people like Walter Russell.

And also Edward Leedskalnin who built Coral Castle (with hard work and leverage. Not levitating the stones.)

I disagree with Walter Russell's take on electrons being only waves. And I disagree with Ed Leedskalnin that electrons don't exist at all. I think they do exist because we can see literal individual impacts on the photo detector screen in two out of the four double slit experiments. They exist and are indeed real particles. But they do not magically "blip in and out of existence"... they do not literally interchange with energy to "become" waves or vice versa... and electrons are not in a state of superposition like quantum theory models. Superposition is a concept reserved for wave-packets only. But because of the misconception of the double slit scenarios... superposition is wrongfully applied to physical particles in states of probability, etc.

That is quantum quackery and misconceptions based from Max Planck's limits that are imposed from Kirchhoff's "Law."

But there was never any experimental validation for Kirchhoff's so called Law. It's invalid. Therefore Max Planck's equations of Planck Length/Temp/Time and Mass are erroneous unless talking about an actual blackbody.

The Misconception of Kirchhoff's "Law":
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1987194179408257103?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

The 4th Law of Thermodynamics:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/2018115757822075034?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

I do agree with Walter Russell that THE SAME light does not travel from the Sun to Earth. It is "reproduced from wave-field to wave-field." Which I take as an esoteric way of conveying Dr. Dowdye's position that brand-new packets of light are re-emitted from medium to medium. Same scenario... different interpretation as to how the end results arise.

The Rebirth of Classical Physics: Time, Light & Gravity:
https://steemit.com/science/@verbz/the-rebirth-of-classic-physics-light-time-and-gravity-jason-verbelli

There is A LOT more to talk about, but again, people's attention spans will burn out. This is why I put together the tetralogy/quadrilogy, totaling 929 pages. To present the reality of the scenarios and show the new; albeit, heretical models in comparison to the outdated models.

I will eventually turn these posts and information from my books into articles to submit for peer review. Showing side-by-side comparisons of the scenarios as the erroneous and dogmatic mainstream model is now... versus reality.

Re-Emission Illusion:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1972324757648679111?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg
I have been asking for help from the community for over 10 years to please help turn these explanations and diagrams into moving visuals and animations so people can easily grasp the concepts.
Not one person has attempted to render anything yet.
The debates of the century are just getting started.

Help with with constancy visualization:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1973429010635067843?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

Help with Faster than Light travel visualization:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1981814022166261889?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

Help with Daredevil visualization:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1979208784531890307?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

Help with Lighter Flick from Mars visualization:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1775972235964219733?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

Help with faster than light communication visualization:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1978509682034802883?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

Help with laser experiments visualization:
1 https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1977869604899922001?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

2 https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1977391240124727443?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

Light travels relative to its source:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1774820646364856731?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

Pulse of Light:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1773766486945145027?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

Velocity of light is dependent upon the velocity of the light source:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1773477961750188268?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

Help with Approaching star visualization:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1977408698239930370?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

Help with Double star visualization:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1973047922528014718?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg