From a new insight about the internal structure and dynamics of quantum particles such as photons andelectrons, a conclusion has been reached that the exact point on the detector screen of a double-slit experimentwhere a photon will land is completely predetermined by fine tuning the initial conditions of the photon andthe electron during emission. This means that where exactly a photon lands on the detecting screen iscompletely predetermined by its initial conditions, just as where exactly a ball lands on the ground ispredetermined by its initial conditions. This means that an interference pattern or any arbitrary pattern could beformed on the detector screen by (almost) infinitely fine-tuning the initial conditions of the photon duringemission, regardless of whether one or both slits are open, regardless of the distance between the slits,regardless of the distance of the detecting screen. In principle, a mechanical version of particle interferencepatterns can be created by repeatedly kicking a ball towards a hole („slit‟ ) in a wall, with a „detector‟ wall atsome arbitrary distance from the hole(s). This would require almost „infinite‟ fine tuning of the initialconditions of the ball, that is initial velocity, initial direction and other parameters. The interference patternoccurred just because of infinite fine tuning of the initial conditions of the ball and not because the ball„interfered‟ with itself. We just made a successful simulation, and created the pattern as if the ball interfered with itself. A supernatural football player can create an „interference‟ pattern on the net by accuratelydeflecting the ball from either pole. The interference pattern in the photon and electron double-slit experiment is fundamentally the same. The conclusion is that aiming a photon to a particular atom on the screen requires(almost) infinite fine-tuning during emission. This raises the burning question: WHO fine-tunes the photonsduring emission so that they form an interference pattern or a Gaussian pattern? The emitting atom? The light source conspiring with the detecting screen? Atoms have infinitely small intelligence as to do the infinitelycomplex task of fine-tuning a photon. The conclusion is that a super natural being is fine-tuning and, literally,aiming each and every photon emitted not only from the light source of a double slit experiment, but also allphotons emitted from all light sources in the universe. The overwhelming evidence of divine intervention isthat photons and electrons cannot by themselves behave both as waves and as particles simultaneously.LITERALLY, God has been behind all confusing light speed experiments and observations made overcenturies. It has been discovered that the correct model of the speed of light is a novel, seamless fusion of ethertheory and emission theory ( Apparent Source Theory ). Photons cannot by themselves exhibit this dual nature.Literally, all dualities observed so far in light, electromagnetism and gravity are possible ONLY by DIRECT divine intervention.
From a new insight about the internal structure and dynamics of quantum particles such as photons andelectrons, a conclusion has been reached that the exact point on the detector screen of a double-slit experimentwhere a photon will land is completely predetermined by fine tuning the initial conditions of the photon andthe electron during emission. This means that where exactly a photon lands on the detecting screen iscompletely predetermined by its initial conditions, just as where exactly a ball lands on the ground ispredetermined by its initial conditions. This means that an interference pattern or any arbitrary pattern could beformed on the detector screen by (almost) infinitely fine-tuning the initial conditions of the photon duringemission, regardless of whether one or both slits are open, regardless of the distance between the slits,regardless of the distance of the detecting screen. In principle, a mechanical version of particle interferencepatterns can be created by repeatedly kicking a ball towards a hole („slit‟ ) in a wall, with a „detector‟ wall atsome arbitrary distance from the hole(s). This would require almost „infinite‟ fine tuning of the initialconditions of the ball, that is initial velocity, initial direction and other parameters. The interference patternoccurred just because of infinite fine tuning of the initial conditions of the ball and not because the ball„interfered‟ with itself. We just made a successful simulation, and created the pattern as if the ball interfered with itself. A supernatural football player can create an „interference‟ pattern on the net by accuratelydeflecting the ball from either pole. The interference pattern in the photon and electron double-slit experiment is fundamentally the same. The conclusion is that aiming a photon to a particular atom on the screen requires(almost) infinite fine-tuning during emission. This raises the burning question: WHO fine-tunes the photonsduring emission so that they form an interference pattern or a Gaussian pattern? The emitting atom? The light source conspiring with the detecting screen? Atoms have infinitely small intelligence as to do the infinitelycomplex task of fine-tuning a photon. The conclusion is that a super natural being is fine-tuning and, literally,aiming each and every photon emitted not only from the light source of a double slit experiment, but also allphotons emitted from all light sources in the universe. The overwhelming evidence of divine intervention isthat photons and electrons cannot by themselves behave both as waves and as particles simultaneously.LITERALLY, God has been behind all confusing light speed experiments and observations made overcenturies. It has been discovered that the correct model of the speed of light is a novel, seamless fusion of ethertheory and emission theory ( Apparent Source Theory ). Photons cannot by themselves exhibit this dual nature.Literally, all dualities observed so far in light, electromagnetism and gravity are possible ONLY by DIRECT divine intervention.
One of the yet unsolved, simplest yet fundamental problems in physics is the question of the speed ofgravitational action. Suppose that the Sun disappeared suddenly. The question is: will gravitational pull of the Sun on Earth disappear instantaneously or with a delay of the speed of light? Based onastronomical observations, some experts have argued that the direction of gravitational pull of the Sun on Earth now is directed towards the position of the Sun now, implying instantaneous transmission. Moreover, they have argued that finite speed of gravity would result in instability of planetary systems. However, another line of reasoning by this author has also shown that this literal view of instantaneous transmission is also wrong. This paradox leads us to a profound conclusion that the speed of gravity has dual nature: light speed and instantaneous. How can this be? The new finding is that causality will be (apparently or actually) violated in gravitational phenomenon as follows. Suppose that the Sun disappeared at time t = 0. The strange thing is that the Sun will anticipate its disappearance and will emit zero gravitational field toward the Earth 8.3 minutes before its actual disappearance! This signal travels at the speed of light and reach the Earth after 8.3 minutes. This means that the signal of zero gravitational field will reach the Earth at time t = 0. The arrival of zero gravitational field at the Earth will coincide exactly in time with the disappearance of the Sun, implying instantaneous transmission. Actually, the discovery of this idea of causality violation did not emerge from investigation of the gravitational phenomenon discussed above. It emerged from a line of reasoning during investigation of quantum phenomena, such as particle interference patterns in double-slit experiments, quantum entanglement, “which way” and quantum erasure experiments. From a new insight about the internal structure and dynamics of quantum particles such as photons and electrons, a conclusion has been reached that the exact point on the detector screen of a double-slit experiment where a photon will land is completely predetermined by fine tuning the initial conditions of the photon and the electron during emission. This means that where exactly a photon lands on the detecting screen is completely predetermined by its initial conditions, just as where exactly a ball lands on the ground is predetermined by its initial conditions. This means that in principle an interference pattern or any arbitrary pattern could be formed on the detector screen by (almost) infinitely fine-tuning the initial conditions of the photon during emission, regardless of whether one or both slits are open, regardless of the distance between the slits, regardless of the distance of the detecting screen. The conclusion is that aiming a photon to a particular atom on the screen requires (almost) infinite fine-tuning during emission. This raises the burning question: WHO fine-tunes the photons during emission so that they form an interference pattern or a Gaussian pattern? The emitting atom? The light source conspiring with the detecting screen? Atoms have infinitely small intelligence as to do the infinitely complex task of fine-tuning a photon. The conclusion is that a super natural being is fine-tuning and, literally, aiming each and every photon emitted not only from the light source of a double slit experiment, but also all photons emitted from all light sources in the universe. The overwhelming evidence of divine intervention is that photons and electrons cannot by themselves behave both as waves and as particles simultaneously. LITERALLY, God has been behind all confusing light speed experiments and observations made over centuries. It has been discovered that the correct model of the speed of light is a novel, seamless fusion of ether theory and emission theory ( Apparent Source Theory ). Photons cannot by themselves exhibit this dual nature. Literally, all dualities observed so far in light, electromagnetism and gravity are possible ONLY by DIRECT divine intervention.
The puzzles of quantum mechanics are: 1. what is the medium for the photon and for the electron wave? i.e. what is waving? 2. particle interference pattern 3. observer effect. 4. entanglement. In Quantum Erasure and Double-Slit experiments, how does the emitter know to direct the photon two both slits or only to one slit? And how does the detector know where to detect the photons to form an interference pattern and not a bell-shaped (Gaussian) pattern or vice versa? This paper proposes a few, closely related, simple and subtle laws of nature governing quantum phenomena. Some of the findings in this paper are: 1. A photon is emitted in two steps: the creation of photon path and the emission of the photon 2. Although (almost) all of the energy of the photon is localized in space, the photon extends to infinity. An extremely small energy of the photon, which we call the 'precursor wave' in this paper, extends to infinity. The instant the photon is emitted, its precursor wave creates a path to infinity; it appears instantaneously in all its path to infinity, with infinitely small energy density. The precursor wave serves as the 'highway' for the propagation of the main energy packet. However, to conserve the principle of causality, we assume that the tip of the photon propagates at a speed billions times the speed of light. Thus, there are two speeds associated with the photon: the speed we know as c and the speed at which the photon length increases. 2. A photon will be emitted only towards an absorber. A photon is emitted by the interaction of the emitter and a detector. It is obvious that a photon will not be emitted if there is no emitter. Nor will a photon be emitted if there is no detector . Once a photon is emitted, however, it exists objectively, autonomously. The photon is emitted only after its path is determined by the interaction of the emitter and the absorber, at the instant of emission. 3. The photon energy will be concentrated where there is higher wave amplitude, i.e higher intensity of oscillation of electric and magnetic fields. This results in 'dragging' of the electromagnetic energy by the wave, hence eliminating the need for any medium. It is also proposed that single photon interference is a quantum phenomenon whereas two photon interference is a classical phenomenon. Similar laws hold for the electron. The 'medium' for the electron wave is the electron (the electron mass density field) itself. Where there is higher intensity of electron wave/oscillation, there will be higher electron mass density. This means that the electron wave 'drags' the electron with itself. Therefore, no exotic 'medium' is required for the photon and for the electron wave.
If we turn down our light source from 100 million whatever photons a second to, say, just ten a second, we see the problem, if not the screen, very clearly. These last few photons of light head off, one by one, for the screen, some of them hitting the piece of card but the odd one going through a slit. Now, according to common sense, each should be able to land on the screen unaffected by whether the other slit is there-or not. But none of them, no matter how long we wait, will try to land on the dark areas seen in the interference pattern with lots of light. After all, if an individual photon could behave in this way, it might take a long time but, eventually, the screen would record a picture more like the one-slit experiment with the light diffusing evenly, than the interference one. And the individual photons recognise the contradiction. They continue to behave individually as ‘waves’ all on their own. Points where the light particle could go when just one slit is open become unavailable when the other slit is open. (Incidentally, the same thing, scientists have observed, will happen with any small particle-electrons, whole atoms or even molecules will do just as well.) In experiments, the individual particles of light seem to know about the other slit on the piece of card, indeed what is going on elsewhere in the universe. For, in principle at least, the distance between the slits can be any size, and the same interference effect will apply. (Although if the slits were even a metre apart, the screen might need to be on the moon before the deflected light begins to converge.) Suppose we asked our neighbour if we could borrow their particle detector to check whether the light energy is still travelling in ‘whole photons’, rather than splitting into two and going through both slits and thereby getting in and out of phase with each other. We would find, indeed, that it was still travelling as a whole photon, and that this attempted explanation does not fit with observation. But we would find something else too. The mere act of putting the particle detector next to one slit causes the wavy pattern, the ‘interference’ effect, to disappear!
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, and the superposition of waves produces the interference pattern. Feynman called the double slit experiment the only mystery in quantum mechanics. In this article, we experimentally show the novel universal phenomena: (1) the light is particles, but waves: within macro-distance from a diaphragm, the light rays produce non-interference patterns; while near the screen, the photons produce orthogonal interference patterns; (2) the non-interference patterns evolve to the orthogonal interference patterns gradually in the same experiment; (3) the evolution of the patterns cannot be interpreted by either classic optics or the quantum optics; (4) the non-interference patterns and the orthogonal interference patterns can show on the screen simultaneously; (5) The convex lens stops the further evolution. The experiments: (1) challenge the classical optics and quantum optics; (2) violate both Bohr’s complementarity principle and wave particle duality; (3) provide profound phenomena for developing optics and for studying the nature of light; (4) suggest that a complete theory should be able to consistently interpret all phenomena, including the non-interference pattern, the interference pattern, and the evolution from the non-interference to the interference pattern in the same wave experiment.
Abstract 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 bright stripes and a sketchy schematic with little relation to the actual result, the double-slit phenomenon was misjudged as being caused by interfering light waves, but this plausible principle implies disastrous flaws. For example, (1) immediately after light passes through the double-slit device, the pattern is generated early or before interference. By changing the device-screen distance, the pattern only scales synchronously without being reconstructed by interference. The pattern with more interference points is darker, but it should be brighter. (2) Light waves can not only be subdivided into many parts but also greatly proliferate. (3) Light waves with missing leading edges outside the screen can still induce much interference. (4) Reflected light waves do not interfere. (5) The effect of polarization direction on interference should not be ignored. (6) Compared with the mathematical model, the location where the dark stripe should appear is actually the brightest spot. The formation principle of multiple regular dark stripes cannot be found. (7) To reflect the quantum property in the interference process, unless all conditions are simultaneously met, interference will not be triggered, and therefore, the principle of interference will be rejected. (8) A light source cannot be produced in a slit that may be in vacuum. (9) In the causality test, to verify the effect of collapse, the photons that have collapsed into particles should be tested again with a double-slit test. (10) The phenomenon of "observed tampering results" is obtained by observation. Has it been tampered with by observation? (11) If light is a wave, then matter and antimatter are conjoined. In conclusion, Newton's particle model is wrong, as is 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, and the superposition of waves produces the interference pattern. Feynman called the double slit experiment the only mystery in quantum mechanics. In this article, we experimentally show the novel universal phenomena: (1) within macro-distance from the diaphragm, the light rays behave as photons and produce non-interference patterns; while near the screen, the photons produce interference patterns; (2) The non-interference patterns evolve to the interference patterns gradually in the same classical wave experiment; (3) the light is photons before and after passing through the double slit; (4) The convex lens stops the further evolution. The experiments: (1) challenge the wave theories of the light; (2) violate both Bohr’s complementarity principle and wave particle duality; (3) provide profound phenomena for developing optics and for studying the nature of light; (4) suggest that a complete theory should be able to consistently interpret all phenomena, including the non-interference pattern, the interference pattern, and the evolution from the non-interference to the interference pattern in the wave experiment; (5) show a new mystery that photons, as particles, distribute as waves.