On Dec 30, 4:59*pm, John Passaneau wrote:
K7ITM wrote:
On Dec 28, 6:36 pm, Art Unwin wrote:
Gauss's boundary contains static particles

Faraday cage contains static particles

Both have a boundary that is conductive and thus can radiate.

Both radiate when a time varying field is applied

Both receive when transformed into a time varying field
provided when the magnetic and electric moves to cancellation

Both are applicable to Maxwell's equations for radiation

Both start and finish with a time varient current.

Both produce a charge by accelerating or removal of a charge via
deceleration of a particle.

The accelerant in both cases is the intersection of two closed fields.
( Electric field and a static field encircled by
the displacement current)

In both cases the particle has a straight line projection with spin

In both cases the particle vector angles equate exactly with that of
gravity and the Earth's rotation

Question * *;
How does the particle ( singular) referred to in each case act like a
wave or become a wave as stated in Classical Physics?

Something for you to ponder, Art:

If we shine monochromatic light source through a pinhole, some
distance behind which there is a white screen, we'll see that the
light is diffracted by the pinhole. *If we have two such pinholes near
each other, we'll see an interference pattern on the screen. *If we
replace the screen with a sensitive detector such as a photomuliplier
with a small aperature which we can move over the area of the screen
it replaces, we can quantitatively map the intensity versus location
in that plane. *If we reduce the intensity of the light source enough,
we can get to the point where the photomultiplier detects individual
photons at even the locations of greatest intensity. *Eventually, we
can get to an intensity where apparently there is almost never more
than one photon at a time on a path from the source to the plane where
the detector is located. *If we count photons for long enough, though,
we can map the intensity at that plane just as we did above. *Now,
will we see the same pattern, the same interference, the same
_relative_ intensities, as we did when there were lots and lots of
photons arriving at that plane? *If so, why? *If not, why not?

Cheers,
Tom

Hi Tom

Not to encourage the nuts, but I have to point out one weird part to
your description. If you reduce the intensity until there is only one
photons at a time in the dark box, that is if a photon comes through the
hole on the right, and none comes through the hole on the left. They
will still show an interference pattern. There is explanation but it
takes someone who knows more physics than I do. But I've built an
apparatus that show just this effect. Why, 40 years of building research
and teaching equipment for physicists.

73 John *W3JXP

Yes. This is fully stated on the web where explanations are provided
that challenge the double slit experiment. I expect the academics to
cry foul, take it personal and then to form together and chant that
they are "nuts" After all, physics professors declare the discussion
is over
and fully decided by them. If one suggests otherwise then they can be
banned.