The question of what magnetism is vital to quantum physics. We know what all other quantum phenomenon is, but we did not know what magnetism is. It is not enough to say it is a force because of a charge. That force must be something, for consistencies sake it had to be tested. This paper was written in order to confirm the results that were received in the experiments that took place that led to the paper “Magnetism: Insights from the Thomas Young Experiment” where it was concluded the magnetic phenomenon is both a particle and a wave. Will different interference patterns confirm a khumalon and wave like behaviour? The khumalon is the name of the particle associated with magnetic phenomenon. This paper concludes by confirming what was discovered in mentioned paper. Magnetism organizes into a wave no matter the interference. Understanding this reality, it allows us to understand what is happening with simple magnetic interactions. When like poles meet because they can not occupy the same space they push each other. Opposite poles are antiparticles to each other and annihilate each other. South pole scientifically speaking is not attracted to the north pole, the reason why the magnets slam each other is because they are closing a magnetic vacuum caused by the particles annihilating each other. We can now start theorizing on why a lodestone attracts iron because we now know we are dealing with a particle.
The delayed-choice experiment and the quantum eraser experiment are two of the most challenging interpretive problems in quantum mechanics. Standard textbook accounts trace the presence or absence of interference to whether the experimenter "knows" the photon's path — a causal framework implying backward-in-time influence. This article offers an intuitive, diagram-rich account grounded in the wave-or-particle geometric framework, revealing that both experiments share a far simpler backbone: interference depends solely on how many waves reach a given detector. One wave → no interference. Two waves → interference. This conclusion alters no mathematical prediction of quantum mechanics; it merely flips the causal arrow from "knowing the path destroys interference" to "the number of waves creates interference." A forthcoming main paper will present the complete three-column correspondence (experimental step → geometry → QFT standard) with full algebraic verification.