[General] research papers

[Albrecht Giese]

Hi Al,

I think that you meet the point quite well. However, the restriction which we both see on the de Broglie wave does not follow from the deduction done by de Broglie. For him this "ficticious wave" is not related to an interaction but accompanies the particle all the time. And otherwise it would not have been logical for Schrödinger to incorporate de Broglie's Ansatz into his wave function.

Tschüß
Albrecht



Von meinem iPad gesendet

> Am 04.11.2015 um 07:33 schrieb af.kracklauer at web.de:
> 
> Hi Albrecht & readers:
>  
> Seems to me that your resolution (proposed) for the problem you have with deBroglie waves actually points at the reason there is no problem.  The key: deBroglie waves are a characteristic of the interaction of the particle with other particles, not an intrinsic property of only the particle.  In this sense it "worls" in (better put: with respct to) in all frames, as the "other" particles can be in any frame.  There is no reason to demand that it be Lorentz invariant.  Doing so is mechanically applying a notion without regard for its originor or function.
>  
> The drawback (as I see it) to your "reflection-conception" is that it requires the primary particle to be continiously emmiting waves (to get reflected) without providing (so far at least) an energy source for this continious emission.
>  
> Tuschss,  Al
>  
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 03. November 2015 um 17:58 Uhr
> Von: "Albrecht Giese" <phys at a-giese.de>
> An: "Richard Gauthier" <richgauthier at gmail.com>
> Cc: "(af.kracklauer at web.de)" <af.kracklauer at web.de>, "Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion" <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>, "Joakim Pettersson" <joakimbits at gmail.com>, "Ariane Mandray" &
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20151104/88acb29e/attachment.htm>