In an earlier number of these Proceedings, (1) Professor G. N. Lewis adopted an extreme form of the light quantum theory, in which the light quanta are assumed to travel in straight lines except when deflected by matter, the facts of interference being explained by the assumption that the quanta do not go to those places where the wave theory forbids the action of radiation. As a crucial test between this and other theories of light, Professor Lewis proposed an experiment in which the absence of light quanta, traveling over a particular path which leads to the center of of an interference band on a screen, would produce an unbalanced torque on a reflecting mirror.
In an earlier number of these Proceedings, (1) Professor G. N. Lewis adopted an extreme form of the light quantum theory, in which the light quanta are assumed to travel in straight lines except when deflected by matter, the facts of interference being explained by the assumption that the quanta do not go to those places where the wave theory forbids the action of radiation. As a crucial test between this and other theories of light, Professor Lewis proposed an experiment in which the absence of light quanta, traveling over a particular path which leads to the center of of an interference band on a screen, would produce an unbalanced torque on a reflecting mirror.
In a recent article in these Proceedings (1) Professor G. N. Lewis has suggested that the conflict between the quantum theory of light and the known facts of interference might be resolved by assuming that an atom never emits a quantum of light except to another atom, the possibility of transmission of the quantum being determined by the nature of the paths connecting the two atoms in such a manner that the transmission will not occur if forbidden by the known laws of interference. The idea is made more plausible by describing such transmissions with the help of Minkowski's four-dimensional geometry of relativity.
Interference experiments were carried out in which the source was so faint that effects could be attributed to separate quanta of radiation. The energy radiated in the helium line 4471A from a glow discharge was measured by comparison with a black body, and from the known decay constant of the atomic radiation process, the separation of atomic radiations in time was deduced. With an echelon diffraction grating the characteristic double order pattern was photographed when each quantum of light passed separately through the instrument. Under these conditions it gave rise to a pattern due to simultaneous passage through several steps. With an air film between two parallel plates, interference fringes were photographed in 4471, when the quanta emitted from the volume of the source used were completely separated in time, showing that a single quantum obeys the classical laws of partial transmission and reflection at a half silvered mirror and of subsequent combination with the phase difference required by the wave theory of light.
Beamsplitting Interference phenomena are certainly among the most exciting phenomena in the whole of physics. In the following we will concentrate mainly on interference of weak fields; i.e. the beams contain, on average, only a few photons. The principle of classical interference is as follows: a light beam is split by an optical element, for example by a semitransparent mirror or a screen with several very small apertures, into two or more partial beams. These beams will take different paths and are then reunited and form interference patterns. The first step, the splitting of the beam into partial beams, plays a decisive role; light beams coming from different sources (or from different spatial areas of the same source) do not interfere with each other! We start our discussion of interference with an analysis of the action of a beamsplitter. To form a realistic idea of this device, let us imagine a semitransparent mirror. (Our considerations apply equally well to a screen with two apertures. We could also generalize to cases of unbalanced mirrors, with reflectivity different from 1/2, or screens with apertures of different size.) The classical wave picture can describe interference phenomena without any great effort: the incoming beam is split into the reflected and the transmitted partial wave, and each of these waves contains half of the energy. The process of splitting becomes conceptually difficult only when we think of the beam as consisting of spatially localized energy packets, or photons.
Abstract Since it was born before its physical achievements, light waves, which have almost no physical properties, are an abstract mathematical concept rather than an objective description. Confused by a set of dark and light streaks and a sketchy schematic that had little to do with the actual result, the double-slit test was misjudged as being caused by interfering light waves, so this plausible principle implied disastrous flaws. For example, (1) Just after passing through the double-slit device, the pattern is generated by light early or before interference. By changing the distance between the device and the screen, the pattern is only scaled synchronously without being reconstructed by interference, and imagined light-wave interference does not occur. (2) Interfering light waves can be subdivided into multiple parts and proliferate greatly. (3) A headless wave of light left outside the screen after the head disappears can still induce much interference. (4) There is no interference effect caused by reflected light waves. (5) The effect of polarization direction on interference is neglected, and the interference condition is incomplete. (6) In the mathematical model, not only are the spots with the highest brightness in the position where dark stripes should appear most, but the principle of generating multiple regular dark stripes cannot be found. (7) Since the quantum property must be carried out in the process of interference, if all conditions are not met at the same time, interference will not be triggered, and therefore, the principle of interference will be rejected. (8) Since light comes only from the radiation of the electron transition, it is impossible to generate a light source in a slit that may be a vacuum. (9) In the causality test, to verify the effect of collapse, the photon that has collapsed into a particle should be tested again with a double slit test. (10) Whether the phenomenon of "observed tampering results" obtained by observation has been tampered with. (11) When the phase is shifted π or the signal is reversed, waves become negative waves capable of annihilating themselves, which is typical of antimatter. In this case, matter and antimatter are conjoined. (12) If the general law of waves is followed, not only the targeted light wave passes through the slit. (13) The original version of the double-slit test cannot be reproduced, and the test results are different from those presented by contemporary technology. (14) Waves must obey Fourier's principle, but light waves, quantum waves and matter waves do not. (15) The modulation effect that waves must produce is not present in optical fiber communication. (16) If the light from different slits must interfere with each other, a mask full of slits will cause the lithographer to fail. (17) Since the size is much smaller than the wavelength, the photon is only a sampling of the light wave, but the corresponding physical properties are not presented. (18) The fact that the two stars orbiting each other do not change color only proves that the phenomenon of redshift is impossible but does not support the inference that the speed of light is constant. (19) The Michelson-Morley test process is not open and transparent enough, and pinhole diffraction and mechanical processing using broken lines instead of curves cannot be ruled out. (20) Kepler's law can block Hubble's law and its derivatives, dark matter and dark energy. In conclusion, Newton's particle model was wrong, but neither was the light wave theory.
Abstract Since it was born before its physical achievements, light waves, which have almost no physical properties, are an abstract mathematical concept rather than an objective description. Beguiled by a series of dark and bright streaks, the results of the double-slit test were misjudged as interfering light waves, so this plausible principle implied disastrous flaws. For example, (1) by changing the distance between the device and the screen, the pattern is only scaled synchronously and not reconstructed, and the expected light-wave interference does not occur. (2) Interfering light waves can be subdivided into multiple parts and proliferate greatly. (3) A headless wave of light left outside the screen after the head disappears can still induce much interference. (4) There is no interference effect caused by reflected light waves. (5) The effect of polarization direction on interference is neglected, and the interference condition is incomplete. (6) In the mathematical model, the location where the dark stripe should appear most is actually the spot with the highest brightness. The principle of generating multiple regular dark stripes cannot be found in the mathematical model. (7) Since the quantum property must be expressed in the process of interference, interference will not be triggered if all conditions are not met at the same time, and therefore, the principle of interference will be rejected. (8) Since light comes only from the radiation of the electron transition, it is impossible to generate a light source in a slit that may be a vacuum. (9) In the causality test, to verify the effect of collapse, the photon that has collapsed into a particle should be tested again with a double slit test. (10) Whether the phenomenon of "observed tampering results" obtained by observation has been tampered with. (11) When the phase is shifted π or the signal is reversed, waves become negative waves capable of annihilating themselves, which is typical of antimatter. In this case, matter and antimatter are conjoined. (12) If the general law of waves is followed, not only the targeted light wave passes through the slit. (13) The original version of the double-slit test cannot be reproduced, and the test results are different from those presented by contemporary technology. (14) Waves must obey Fourier's principle, but light waves, quantum waves and matter waves do not. (15) The modulation effect that waves must produce is not present in optical fiber communication. (16) If the light from different slits must interfere with each other, a mask full of slits will cause the lithographer to fail. (17) Since the size is much smaller than the wavelength, the photon is only a sampling of the light wave, but the corresponding physical properties are not presented. (18) The fact that the two stars orbiting each other do not change color only proves that the phenomenon of redshift is impossible but does not support the inference that the speed of light is constant. (19) The Michelson-Morley test process is not open and transparent enough, and pinhole diffraction and mechanical processing using broken lines instead of curves cannot be ruled out. (20) Kepler's law can block Hubble's law and its derivatives, dark matter and dark energy. In conclusion, Newton's particle model was wrong, but neither was the light wave theory.
Young’s double slit experiments revived the wave theory of light. The standard interpretation is that the light behaves as waves before and after passing through the double slit. Feynman called the double slit experiment the only mystery in quantum mechanics. By placing a convex lens at different positions, we have shown: (1) Near the diaphragm, light behaves as photons and produces a non-interference pattern; near the screen, the photons produce an interference pattern; (2) The non-interference pattern evolves to the orthogonal interference pattern gradually in the same experiment; (3) The convex lens stops the further evolution. It is heuristic for study the nature of light by showing all of three different kinds of patterns on the screen simultaneously. For this purpose, in this article, we setup three paths. The light is divided into three portions, each portion propagates along one path. Then inserting three lenses to different Zones of different paths. Experiments show that two non-interference patterns and interference pattern simultaneously emerge on the same screen. The experiments: (1) challenge the wave theories of light; (2) violate Bohr’s complementarity principle; (3) provide profound phenomena for further development of optics and for study of the nature of light; (4) suggest that a complete theory should be able to simultaneously interpret the non-interference pattern, the interference pattern, and the evolution from the non-interference to the interference pattern in the same experiment.