Quantum theory does not have a mechanism that explains how nature implements probabilities. Thus, the main objective of this paper is to present new directions in the understanding of probabilities and randomness with the eventual objective of controlling photon localization (in a future paper). The expectation is to improve photon collection and loss mitigation. The conservation of energy within the photon’s transverse electromagnetic wave requires that energy is transferred between spacetime (x,y,z,t) and subspace (x,y,z). This paper proposes that it is in this subspace that nature implements probabilities. The paper analyses the differences between probabilities and randomness and infers that all particles have internal clocks C, that is the mechanism for randomness. A glass thought experiment is used to clarify how probabilities are effected and as a result it is proposed that the random distribution of photons across the Point Spread Function or Airy Pattern (not Airy Disc) is not due to the photon probability but due to the random behaviour of electron shells receiving the photon localization. Finally, 5 experiments are proposed.
Quantum theory does not have a mechanism that explains how nature implements probabilities. Thus, the main objective of this paper is to present new directions in the understanding of probabilities and randomness with the eventual objective of controlling photon localization (in a future paper). The expectation is to improve photon collection and loss mitigation. The conservation of energy within the photon’s transverse electromagnetic wave requires that energy is transferred between spacetime (x,y,z,t) and subspace (x,y,z). This paper proposes that it is in this subspace that nature implements probabilities. The paper analyses the differences between probabilities and randomness and infers that all particles have internal clocks C, that is the mechanism for randomness. A glass thought experiment is used to clarify how probabilities are effected and as a result it is proposed that the random distribution of photons across the Point Spread Function or Airy Pattern (not Airy Disc) is not due to the photon probability but due to the random behaviour of electron shells receiving the photon localization. Finally, 5 experiments are proposed.
Quantum theory does not have a mechanism that explains how Nature implements probabilities. Thus, the main objective of this paper is to present new directions for the photonics research for the control of photon localization from probabilistic properties, and another step towards a probability field theory. The expectation is to improve photon collection and loss mitigation. The paper delves into the physics of photon probability control to explain the basis for the 4 new proposed experiments. It is known that photons are not affected by the presence of electric or magnetic fields. Therefore, an alternative question is, can photon probabilities be controlled? Probability control means vectoring and modulation. Vectoring is the control of the direction of localization, and modulation is the control of the distance to localization. This paper proposes a control mechanism by rethinking the foundations of quantum theory, using (i) a modified Schrodinger wave function, (ii) a new structure for particle design, (iii) the existence of subspace (x, y, zand no t), (iv) that all particles consists of a disc of the modified Schrodinger or the probabilistic wave function, orthogonal to the particle’s motion vector and (v) all other particle properties (e.g. electromagnetic wave, charge, mass, etc.) are added to this structure. The shape of the new probabilistic wave function is very close to that of the Schrodinger wave function. It is proposed that probabilities can be controlled by altering the electric and magnetic field densities, as probabilities are function the electric and magnetic fields. Thus, a new formula for the Airy Pattern. Modified Airy Pattern experiments are proposed to confirm these findings. These include measuring the photon’s electric field amplitude, the electric fields in materials, using the Airy Pattern to filter photons by their phase. The new theoretical results confirm that probability is a function of the wavelength. Finally, more than 4 experiments are proposed.
An interpretation of quantum mechanics involving multiple dimensions is proposed, as well as a thought experiment that in principle if performed correctly could either prove or disprove quantum randomness. All outcomes, of a particle’s wave function manifest but manifest in more than three dimensions, and when the wave function collapses, we see the outcome of the wave function, which only exist in three dimensions. Furthermore, a particle is a much larger object, and exists physically as a wave across more than three dimensions and our best description of this is the Schrodinger wave, because it only describes it in three dimensions. We cannot observe the particle as a wave because it is spread out as an object in which most of it exists in more than three dimensions, but when we observe the part or outcome of a wave function that does exist in three dimensions, which is when collapse occurs it leads to particle like properties, due to not being able to interact with the rest of the wave because it is confined to just interacting on a three dimensional scale because we are observing it in three dimensions. Furthermore we cannot observe the part of the wave function that exists in more than three dimensions, in three dimensions because of the principle that in order to observe an object in it's entirety it needs to be observed in all of it's dimensions. Strange phenomenon in quantum mechanics such as tunneling, can be explained by saying that there is a probability of finding the part of wave function that exists in three dimensions on the other side of the barrier, which has travelled over that barrier classically and the probability of it travelling over the barrier decreases expontentially to the width of the barrier increasing. Whether the quantum world is random, or is determined by non-local hidden variables, can be determined by a simple deductive thought experiment as outlined in this article.
Quantum Physics is usually defined as a theory that affirms a primary role of randomness and probability. Eleven well-known quantum experiments are examined and the result is the coexistence of both random and causal type behaviour. We need both to describe experiments. Quantum Mechanics states the general overcoming of causality and this statement constitutes an unlimited generalization, not supported by experience. Determinism and indeterminism are philosophical systems, that universalize causality or chance. The crucial point is the difference between epistemic and intrinsic randomness. In the first aspect, randomness does not have a fundamental meaning, in the second, randomness of the individual event is explained, but the detection of high stable regularities remains to be explained. The article addresses the question of entanglement and various aspects of probability theory, including the law of large numbers, arriving at the thesis that many relevant questions are unresolved. A causal description is in quantum mechanics impossible in principle, given its assumptions. In order not to contradict experience, both points of view are necessary, causal and random. This is the state of the research, to return to and start again from.
We investigate, both experimentally and theoretically, the interpretation of the free-electron wave function using spontaneous emission. We use a transversely wide single-electron wave function to describe the spatial extent of transverse coherence of an electron beam in a standard transmission electron microscope. When the electron beam passes next to a metallic grating, spontaneous Smith-Purcell radiation is emitted. We then examine the effect of the electron wave function transversal size on the emitted radiation. Two interpretations widely used in the literature are considered: (1) radiation by a continuous current density attributed to the quantum probability current, equivalent to the spreading of the electron charge continuously over space; and (2) interpreting the square modulus of the wave function as a probability distribution of finding a point particle at a certain location, wherein the electron charge is always localized in space. We discuss how these two interpretations give contradictory predictions for the radiation pattern in our experiment, comparing the emission from narrow and wide wave functions with respect to the emitted radiation's wavelength. Matching our experiment with a new quantum-electrodynamics derivation, we conclude that the measurements can be explained by the probability distribution approach wherein the electron interacts with the grating as a classical point charge. Our findings clarify the transition between the classical and quantum regimes and shed light on the mechanisms that take part in general light-matter interactions.
The formation of an obvious interference pattern in the distribution of the probability of the simultaneous hit of two alone photons radiated synchronously from two independent single-photon sources, playing the slits role of Young's experiment first screen, at different points of the second screen, is demonstrated by modeling the photon coordinate wave function. This function is single-photon wave packet built within the framework of the developed quantum mechanics of the photon in previous authors works, which expresses a superposition of six-component “plane waves with circular polarization” - the eigenfunctions of the operators of photon momentum, of its energy and helicity. The results received make it eventual to justify the description of one-and two-photon interference in framework of “primary” quantization of the electromagnetic field, without resorting to the probability amplitudes of quantum field theory, which, in turn, makes it possible to develop a metaphysical interpretation of experiments with single photons, such as quantum computing, quantum teleportation, quantum cryptography. It seems that this interpretation can serve as an impetus for the development of new practical devices and the setting up of new experiments to reveal the physical nature of quantum interactions through the exchange of photons and, in particular, the physical essence displayed by the idea of quantum object wave function.
This article is the third of a trilogy of articles on the nature of probability in quantum mechanics. The first article [1] began by noting that superposed wavefunctions in quantum mechanics lead to a squared amplitude that introduces interference into the position probability density of an atomic particle, which happens nowhere else in probability theory. It went on to also note that there is an unexplained coincidence in quantum mechanics in that the interference term in the squared amplitude of superposed wavefunctions gives the squared amplitude the form of a variance of a sum of correlated random variables and went on to examine whether there could be an archetypical variable, in the Platonic sense of true form, behind quantum probability that would reconcile quantum probability with classic probability. This examination found such a variable, which can encompass both local and nonlocal quantum events. The second article [2] provided evidence that quantum probability has such a stochastic nature. This evidence was based on the number of electrons that need to be sent through a two-slit interferometer to gain a clear pattern of self-interference, which when compared with the number that would be expected to be sufficient in order for the position probability distribution of the self-interference wavefunction to take clear shape suggests that there is more variability present than that described by the formulation of quantum mechanics, which implies the presence of an underlying and as yet unrecognized physical process. This final article completes the trilogy by considering how a key aspect of experimental design would be affected by the increased variability that would be present if quantum probability is itself stochastic in the manner suggested in the previous two articles.