This essay presents an alternate theory for the mechanism of electromagnetic refraction and diffraction interference patterns and provides arguments in support of new concepts for these phenomena. These concepts are predicated on the idea that free-space appears to be composed of an energy field with characteristics of an elastic medium that the author termed “spatial energy field” or SEF. It is proposed that the geometric volume of space requires conservation, and this is achieved via stretching or compression of space while exhibiting elastic and wavelike qualities. The SEF, representing spacetime, has specific properties that appear to lead to the emergence of electromagnetic refraction and diffraction. It is proposed that the conservation of spatial volume affects the outcome of particle refraction and diffraction interference patterns. A mechanism for refraction is explained by higher density spacetime (SEF) near atomic nuclei reducing the apparent velocity of transmitted photons. For diffraction, momentum guiding “pilot waves” of spacetime (SEF) is presented as the mechanism for production and redirection of minima and maxima interference patterns of particles.
This essay presents an alternate theory for the mechanism of electromagnetic refraction and diffraction interference patterns and provides arguments in support of new concepts for these phenomena. These concepts are predicated on the idea that free-space appears to be composed of an energy field with characteristics of an elastic medium that the author termed “spatial energy field” or SEF. It is proposed that the geometric volume of space requires conservation, and this is achieved via stretching or compression of space while exhibiting elastic and wavelike qualities. The SEF, representing spacetime, has specific properties that appear to lead to the emergence of electromagnetic refraction and diffraction. It is proposed that the conservation of spatial volume affects the outcome of particle refraction and diffraction interference patterns. A mechanism for refraction is explained by higher density spacetime (SEF) near atomic nuclei reducing the apparent velocity of transmitted photons. For diffraction, momentum guiding “pilot waves” of spacetime (SEF) is presented as the mechanism for production and redirection of minima and maxima interference patterns of particles.
Refraction, interference, and diffraction are distinguishing features of wavelike phenomena. Although they are usually associated only with a purely spatial wave-propagation pattern, analogs to interference and diffraction involving the spatio-temporal dynamics of waves in one dimension have been discussed. We complete the triplet of analogies by discussing how spatio-temporal analogs to refraction are exhibited by a quantum particle in one dimension that is scattering off a step barrier. Similarly, birefringence in spacetime occurs for a spin-1/2 particle in a magnetic field.
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. How can a particle have an 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 that the hint in the mystery of light waves without a medium (ether) is contained in the Planck’s relation itself: E = hf. It is shown that Planck’s relation itself hints on the mystery of light waves without medium, and is a consequence or manifestation of non-existence of a medium for light propagation. The subtle law of nature that has eluded physicists so far is that the photon energy density ( amplitude of electric and magnetic fields) at a given point in the spatial dimensions of the photon is directly related to the rate of change of the electric and magnetic fields at that point. The higher the frequency of the photon, the higher the rate of change of the fields at every point for that photon, compared to a photon of lower frequency. The higher the rate of change of the fields at a given point, the higher the amplitude of oscillation of the electric and magnetic fields at that point. It follows that the higher the frequency of the photon and the higher the amplitude of the electric and magnetic fields, which results in high intensity of vibration of the photon, the more localized it will be. A high frequency photon will spread less in space than a lower frequency photon of equal envelope amplitude because, if the high frequency photon spreads out, there would be high rates of change over a wider region of space, and the total energy would be greater than the finite photon energy. The photon energy will always be concentrated at regions of high rate of change of electric and magnetic fields. This theory explains how electric and magnetic fields can be their own ‘medium’ , 'dragging' of the electromagnetic energy by the wave, hence eliminating the need for any medium. Since the electromagnetic wave (the photon) is a traveling disturbance of electric and magnetic fields, the rate of change of the fields at a point in space will create the intensity (amplitude) of the fields at that point. Likewise, the electron wave is a travelling disturbance of the electron mass density wave on the electron ‘sea’. The higher the frequency of mass density variation of the electron at a given point of space, the higher the mass density of the electron at that point. This will make the electron ( the electron ‘sea’) its own medium of propagation. i.e. the electron ‘sea’ is the medium of propagation for the electron wave. This means that the electron wave 'drags' the electron with itself. The other theory proposed in this paper is the predetermination of interference fringes in double-slit experiments and predetermination of which slit the photon takes in which-way or quantum erasure experiments. We propose a fundamental law of nature that an electron, an atom or any source of electromagnetic waves will always emit a weak, continuous electromagnetic energy even when not excited, which implies that electrons and atoms are always in continuous, fundamental, weak vibrations (accelerations). Therefore, in double-slit experiments and in quantum erasure or which-way experiments, the atom (electron) of the light source is always emitting weak, continuous electromagnetic waves, even before the atom is excited. Therefore, even before the atom/the electron of the light source starts emitting a photon, a weak electromagnetic (light) wave exists as an entity, extending all the way from the light source (the atom) to the slits and to the detecting screen. This ‘precursor’ wave serves as the 'highway' for the propagation of the main photon energy packet, both of which are coherent and exist as an entity. When the atom is excited, it will just emit a photon that is coherent with the weak wave it had already been emitting continuously. Therefore, even before the atom is excited, a weak wave interference pattern already exists on the screen. The photon emitted after excitation simply follows the path already created by the weak ‘precursor’ wave and will land on the screen according to the predetermined interference pattern, collapsing to the point of detection at the instant of detection. The path to be taken by the photon is predetermined in which-way or quantum erasure experiments. The same theory explains quantum entanglement: the polarization of two entangled photons is predetermined even before the excitation of the atoms emitting the photons.
This paper demonstrates that the interference patterns observed in double-slit experiments are not the result of wave-particle duality—where particles transform into waves—but are rather phenomena arising from the structural commands imposed upon energy by space. The point of departure for this study is that electrons or photons do not oscillate between being particles and waves; instead, the same solitonic energy simply appears differently depending on whether it is sealed within or released from the spatial structure. In this paper, mass is not an independent entity. Mass is a state that manifests only when solitonic energy vibrations are maintained as standing waves within a cubic spatial structure. When energy is stably confined within this structure, we refer to it as a “particle.” When this seal is broken, the energy ceases to be a particle and becomes an informational state propagating over the spatial medium. The rule of space that seals this energy is defined by 6π⁵. 6π⁵ is not an arbitrarily adjusted figure but a structural sealing specification that arises inevitably from the convergence of three factors: The 6 degrees of freedom (±x, ±y, ±z) inherent in a hexahedron (cube). The final dimensional closure (L⁵) required for information to be transmuted into mass, by adding the core axes of the spatial medium—ε (dielectric response) and μ (magnetic response)—to the 3D volume (L³). The rotational phase condition π necessary to maintain a standing wave. In simpler terms, 6π⁵ is a command issued by space to solitonic vibrations, instructing them to “vibrate only within this range,” and it is an informational structure that exists because only then can a standing wave be maintained. If this range is exceeded, the phase is broken, and the energy cannot be sealed.
The formidable problem with double-slit experiments is: if electrons and photons exhibit wave properties (seen as interference patterns), then what is waving? What is the medium for transmission of ‘electron waves’? Such a medium has been disproved experimentally, in the case of the photon, and not even conceivable for the electron. Erwin Schrodinger was on the right track with his view of the electron as a ‘smeared’ object, rather than as a point particle. Then how is a wave possible without a medium? How can a wave property and a particle property co-exist in a single physical entity (wave- particle duality)? Nature uses a simple and subtle trick : the average electron mass density at a given region of space is directly proportional to the root mean square (RMS) intensity of oscillation (velocity) of the electron (the electron wave) in that region. The instantaneous mass density of the electron at a given point is directly proportional to the instantaneous magnitude of vibrational velocity of the electron at that point. The average photon energy density in a given region of space is directly proportional to the root mean square of rate of change of the electric and magnetic fields in that region. The instantaneous energy density of the photon at a given point of space and time is directly proportional to the magnitude of rate of change of the electric and magnetic fields at that point. The rate of change of electric and magnetic fields in turn depends on the frequency, amplitude and phase of the wave. The electron mass and photon energy will always be concentrated at regions of high wave amplitude. This means that the electron and the photon are dragged by their respective waves. The new theory provides a hint on the mystery behind Planck’s relation: E=h.f. Higher frequency photons have higher energy than lower frequency photons just because higher frequency photons also have higher amplitudes of electric and magnetic field oscillations. If we assume that ordinary waves also have the same fundamental properties as electron waves, then we may be able to explain the lack of backward propagation in Huygens’ principle. We may be able to explain why the bouncing oil droplet in the Couder-Fort oil bath experiment starts to go in the direction of the wave propagation.
At the beginning of the century doubts were growing about the whole edifice of classical physics, including the laws of mechanics in their Lagrangian and Hamiltonian forms, of statistical thermodynamics, as formulated by Boltzmann and Gibbs, and of optics, namely Maxwell’s and Fresnel’s theory. Einstein proposed that electromagnetic radiation exists in discrete quanta whilst propagating in space as well as during the emission or absorption processes. Scattering by free electrons is a common interaction connected with the absorption of electromagnetic radiation. If the electromagnetic energy is large compared with the ionization energy, the atomic electron can be treated as free. The characteristic features of the scattered radiation have been explained by Compton, on the basis of an elastic collision of a photon with a free electron, where both energy and momentum are conserved. The concept of the matter wavelength holds for both relativistic and non-relativistic particles, provided that the appropriate form of momentum is used.
Diffraction and interference fringes are stable and reproducible objective phenomena in optical experiments. Mainstream quantum mechanics puts forward the ontological interpretation of wave particle duality. It holds that the material ontology of micro particles such as photons inherently possesses both particle and wave properties, and attributes diffraction and interference phenomena directly to the intrinsic matter wave behavior of particles. This interpretation stays at the level of observational appearance and avoids underlying ontological dynamic mechanisms. It represents a research approach that deduces the intrinsic properties of material ontology merely from external observations. Within the framework of the light ontology theory, a photon is an energy state object. Energy and motion at the speed of light form an inseparable whole and are permanently bound together and cannot be separated. In the real universe, no photon with energy that does not travel at the speed of light has ever been observed. Nor has any object moving at the speed of light without energy been detected. The two cannot exist independently from one another. A photon has no physical volume but possesses inherent fixed transverse trembling property. At the moment a photon is generated, it acquires a definite trembling angle within a 360 degree spatial plane perpendicular to its propagation direction. This transverse trembling orientation remains unchanged without physical collision interaction. When the transverse trembling of a photon can reach the slit wall, absorption and reradiation secondary scattering will occur. Massive secondary photons superpose statistically to form bright and dark diffraction and interference fringes. Slit walls are stacked by large numbers of atoms. Their spatial scale is hundreds of thousands to tens of millions times larger than the scale of photon transverse trembling. For photons, slit walls constitute huge physical barriers and can produce significant interactions with trembling photons. The wave function is only a mathematical tool for fitting experimental data. Good fitting performance of a mathematical model does not mean its corresponding physical interpretation equals objective physical reality. This paper proposes a new set of comparative decisionmaking experiments. The key innovation is to place a linear polarizer in front of the slit. Before photons contact the slit, the transverse trembling orientation of photons is pre screened. The transverse trembling direction of transmitted photons is made parallel to the orientation of vertical slit walls to suppress oscillation components perpendicular to slit walls and make it difficult for photons to hit slit walls. Polarizers with different grating line widths can be replaced to observe the influence of the grating scale of polarizers on experimental results. According to the physical mechanism of slit wall scattering, characteristic diffraction and interference fringes will be greatly attenuated and only the central direct light spot will remain. Non ideal device characteristics will bring a small amount of stray scattering background, but complete bright and dark diffraction and interference structures will not appear. According to the traditional ontological interpretation of wave particle duality, the geometric parameters of slits remain completely unchanged. Only polarization orientation screening is conducted and the intrinsic matter wave of particle ontology is not affected. Therefore diffraction and interference fringes should be fully preserved. The two theories produce mutually exclusive observable predictions. This experiment can test whether the ontological interpretation of wave particle duality holds true. This paper does not deny objective diffraction and interference phenomena, nor does it deny the practical value of wave function as an engineering calculation tool.