Slashdot Mirror
Double-Slit Experiment in Time, Not Space
TheMatt writes "Thomas Young's double-slit experiment is a classic experiment that helped establish the wave-like nature of light. Since then, it has been done with atoms, buckyballs, and biomolecules. It has even been seen in a single molecule, and the single electron version was voted the most beautiful experiment by Physics World readers (covered previously on Slashdot). Now, PhysicsWeb is reporting that Gerhard Paulus and coworkers have conducted the double-slit experiment using a double-slit in time, not space. The "slit" was a crafted femtosecond pulse consisting of one-and-a-half cycles--say, two maxima and one minima--passed through an argon gas. Each maxima has a probability of ionizing an argon atom and producing an electron. The electrons were accelerated to a detector which observed an interference pattern since the detector had no idea which maximum produced the electron."
Why is Einstein's picture being shown on an article about quantum physics, which explain everything but gravity? He only worked with gravity.
a) that site won't be /.ed
b) post anonymously so you're not perceived as a karma whore.
This experiment supports Dr. Elliot's theory of moving dimensions: http://physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=64559 http://physicsmathforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=55 The four-dimensions of space-time are divided into three spatial dimensions and one time dimension. In the space-time metric, s^2=x^2+y^2+z^2-c^2t^2, the minus sign and c^2 distinguishes t from the three spatial dimensions. Why the minus sign exists is most often glossed over--it is considered to just "be" there. This paper explains the minus sign by proposing that the time dimension, the actual coordinate system, is moving relative to the three spatial dimensions. The time dimension is expanding at a rate of c relative to the three spatial dimensions, in a spherically symmetric manner. Many trained physicists have a knee-jerk reaction that the time dimension cannot be moving because "dimensions cannot move." First off, since the universe is expanding, space-time is also expanding, showing that dimensions are moving and expanding. Secondly, general relativity demonstrates that massive objects warp space-time, meaning that as a massive object moves though space-time, it stretches space-time, showing again that space-time in one area can move, or deform, relative to space-time in another area. Rather than just accepting the minus sign in front of the c^2t^2 as being there because it just is there, this paper aims to look at the deeper reality which gives rise to the minus sign. A physicist's job is not to accept things on blind faith, nor only ask questions that are allowed to be asked, but a physicist's job is to wonder. And that wonder, which seems all but forgotten in the bureaucratization of modern physics, leads to a deeper beauty. That the time dimension is different somehow from the three spatial dimensions is obvious. This difference is a result of the time dimension moving relative to the spatial dimensions. Picture four dimensions--three spatial dimensions and one time dimension. An object can be rotated so that its projection along any particular axis decreases. When an object is rotated into time, its projection along the x, y, and z directions decreases. This is known as relativistic length contraction. Relativistic length contraction is *always* accompanied by time dilation and an increase in the object's velocity. It is not possible to conduct a Lorentz transformation on a ruler, where it is rotated into the time dimension, without the ruler gaining a velocity through the three spatial dimensions. Because rotating an object into the time dimension always results in the object gaining a velocity relative to the spatial dimensions, one can conclude that the time dimension must be moving. Einstein's two postulates of relativity state: I. The laws of physical phenomena are the same in all inertial frames. II. The velocity of light in free space is a universal constant, independent of any relative motion of the source and the observer. I propose that the two postulates may be expressed in an alternative manner, by stating the following law of moving dimensions: I. The time dimension is moving relative to the three spatial dimensions. This can be shown illustrated in several ways: Consider an expression for the space-time interval of zero length, or of the null vector, which traces a photon's path through space-time: x^2+y^2+z^2-c^2t^2=0 or x^2+y^2+z^2=c^2t^2 Which for one spatial dimension becomes x^2=c^2t^2 or x=ct by taking the derivative of both sides with respect to t, we get dx/dt = d/dt (ct) = c so dx/dt = c And hence the time rate of change of the spatial dimension relative to the time rate of change of the time dimension is equal to the velocity of light. ct | / | / | / | / | / |/_______________ x Also, if we trace the path of a photon on a space-time diagram, the only way for a photon to remain stationary in space-time is to move at the speed of light, or to keep up with the expanding time dimension. The null vector, which represents a vector of zero length in space-time, can only imply zero movement t
Dr. Elliot's treating this as an open-source physics project, if anyone would like to join him at http://physicsmathforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=55
/ / / / /
Einstein's two postulates of relativity state:
I. The laws of physical phenomena are the same in all inertial frames. II. The velocity of light in free space is a universal constant,independent of any relative motion of the source and the observer.
I propose that the two postulates may be expressed in an alternative manner, by stating the following law of moving dimensions:
I. The time dimension is moving relative to the three spatial dimensions.
This can be shown illustrated in several ways: Consider an expression for the space-time interval of zero length, or of the null vector, which traces a photon's path through space-time:
x^2+y^2+z^2-c^2t^2=0 or x^2+y^2+z^2=c^2t^2
Which for one spatial dimension becomes x^2=c^2t^2
or x=ct
by taking the derivative of both sides with respect to t, we get
dx/dt = d/dt (ct) = c
so
dx/dt = c
And hence the time dimension is moving relative to the spatial dimension at a rate of c.
ct |
|
|
|
|
|/_______________ x
Also, if we trace the path of a photon on a space-time diagram, the only way for a photon to remain stationary in space-time is to move at the speed of light, or to keep up with the expanding time dimension. The null vector, which represents a vector of zero length in space-time, can only imply zero movement through space-time. Even though a photon moves through space at a velocity equal to C, it stays stationary in space-time. Is it not strange at first that in order to remain stationary in space time, a photon appears move at the speed of light through space? This is only because the time dimension itself is moving relative to space.
Einstein proclaimed that all objects travel through space-time at c. Even though we perceive a ruler along the x axis to be stationary, it is yet traveling through space-time at the fixed speed of c, implying that time is moving through it. Rotate it towards the y axis, and its projection upon the x axis shortens, yet it still appears to be stationary, and it is still traveling through space-time at the rate of c. Rotate it into the time dimension, and it's projection along the x axis still shortens (Lorentz contraction), but now it begins to move through the three spatial dimensions, while maintaining the fixed speed of c through space-time. Again, we see it move through the three spatial dimensions as it is rotated into the time dimension because the time dimension is moving relative to the three spatial dimensions.
As an object moves through space, it is rotated into the time dimension, and less wave fronts of time are allowed to pass through it relative to a stationary object, which bears the full brunt of wave fronts. Thus a moving clock will run slower, as all clocks are based on the probabilistic emission and propagation of photons, and as a moving clock catches up with the expanding wavefront of time, the chance that a photon will be emitted without being reabsorbed is diminished.
Thus it is shown that the spatial and temporal dimensions are moving relative to one-another. The laws and equations of relativity and quantum mechanics rest upon this fundamental nature of physical reality.
Relativistic and quantum mechanical phenomena can be accounted for by the underlying nature of the relatively moving dimensions. Time dialation, relativistic length contraction, and the equivalence of mass and energy can all be seen to derive from this concept of moving dimensions. The statistical wave nature of matter and energy also rests upon the relative motion of the underlying dimensions.
As one rotates into the time dimension, one becomes more orthogonal to the spatial dimensions, and thus one's l
Thanks for the feedback.
Dr. Elliot's theory of moving dimenstions stands unrefuted.
He's working on the final paper, and feedback utilizing logic and reason would be very useful.
The only way to stay still in the three spatial dimensions is to move at the velocity of light c through time. The only way to stay still in the time dimension is to move at the velocity of light c through space. How else can this be explained, but with space and time coordinates moving relative to one-another, with the time dimsion expanding as a spherically symmetric wavefront?
It would be great if the detractors could use logic and reason in refuting Dr. E's theory, rather than just refuting it by dismissing it.
What doesn't make sense in his theory?
If you think he's going wrong, where is he going wrong?
The time dimension is moving relative to the spatial dimensions.