Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
You may have taken the first step along the path to enlightenment. It
has been explained previously on RRAA that interference is a result,
not a cause.

Of course, the Big Bang is the cause of everything,
but what caused the Big Bang?

When one says A causes B which causes C which causes
D, etc., it is not false to say C causes D. There may
be a long line of causes and effects. One step's cause
is the previous step's effect. Interference causes
visible interference rings in a light experiment. And
of course, interference is just one event in a long
line of cause and effect. Without interference, there
would be no interference rings. Without beams of light,
there would be no interference. Without a Big Bang,
there would be no light.

In a line of events, interference is an event that has
a cause and has an effect.

Cecil,

You just proved the point perfectly. I did not say that interference is
imaginary or that it is not a useful description. I said that
interference is not a primary tool for achieving detailed numerical
solutions. It is a result from such calculations.

Now put your hands down, solve the real equations, and stop all that
mumbo-jumbo about canceling waves and reversing momentum.

8-)

73,
Gene
W4SZ