[General] De Broglie Wave
Albrecht Giese
genmail at a-giese.de
Mon Feb 8 05:41:36 PST 2016
Hi Al,
if you follow de Broglie, you should have an explanation for the
following experiment (here again):
Electrons move at 0.1 c towards the double slit. Behind the double slit
there is an interference pattern generated, which in the frame of the
slit follows the rule of de Broglie. But now there is an observer also
moving at 0.1 c parallel to the beam of electrons. In his frame the
electrons have momentum=0 and so wavelength=infinite. That means: No
interference pattern. But there is in fact a pattern which does not
disappear just because there is another observer. And the moving
observer will see the pattern. - This is a falsification of de Broglie's
rule. What else?
The understanding that the de Broglie wave is a property of the particle
(even though depending on their speed, but not on an interaction) was
not my idea but the one of Schrödinger and Dirac and many others. Also
by de Broglie himself.
Ciao Albrecht
Am 08.02.2016 um 03:30 schrieb af.kracklauer at web.de:
> Hi Albrecht:
> BUT, the laws of Physics for "being" in a frame are not the laws for
> interacting between frames! The deB. wave is not a feature of a
> particle in its own frame, but a feature of the interaction of such a
> particle with at least one other particle in another frame. When the
> two frames are moving with respect to each other, then the features of
> the interaction cannot be Lorentz invariants. When one particle is
> interacting with another particle (or ensemble---slit say) the
> relevant physics is determined by the deB wave in that sitation,
> whatever it looks like to an observer in a third frame with yet
> different relative velocities. It is a perspective effect: a tree is
> the same ontological size in fact no matter how small it appears to
> distant observers. Observed diminished size(s) cannot be "invriant."
> Appearances =/= ,,so sein''.
> You have gotten your head stuck on the idea that deB. waves are
> characteristics intrinsic to particles in an of themselves.
> Recalibrate! DeB waves are charactteristics of the mutual
> interaction of particles.
> Best, Al
> *Gesendet:* Sonntag, 07. Februar 2016 um 22:10 Uhr
> *Von:* "Albrecht Giese" <genmail at a-giese.de>
> *An:* af.kracklauer at web.de
> *Cc:* general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org, "Richard Gauthier"
> <richgauthier at gmail.com>
> *Betreff:* Re: [General] De Broglie Wave
> Hi Al,
>
> at one of your points I really disagree. The physical laws have to be
> fulfilled in every frame. That means that all physical processes have
> to obey the same laws in all frames. So also the process at the double
> slit. But the rule given by de Broglie looks correct in only one
> frame, that is the frame where the double slit is at rest. For an
> observer in motion the diffraction pattern looks very similar as for
> the observer at rest, but for the observer in motion the results
> according to de Broglie are completely different, because the momentum
> of the particle is different in a wide range in the frame of a moving
> observer and so is the wavelength assigned to the particle.
>
> The specific case: At electron scattering, the observer co-moving with
> the electron will see a similar pattern as the observer at rest, but
> de Broglie says that for this observer there does not exist any
> pattern. That is strongly incorrect.
>
> The Schrödinger equation and also the Dirac function should have
> correct results in different frames, at least at non-relativistic
> speeds. This requirement is clearly violated through their use of de
> Broglie's rule.
>
> Grüße
> Albrecht
>
> PS: Your article refers to "Stochastic Electrodynamics". That is in my
> knowledge not standard physics and so a new assumption.
>
> Am 07.02.2016 um 19:03 schrieb af.kracklauer at web.de:
>
> Hi Albrecht:
> In my view the story in my paper has no new assunptions, rather
> new words for old assumptions. As I, along with most others, see
> it, there is no conflict with experiment, but a less than fully
> transparent explantion for experimental observations (particle
> beam diffrction) otherwise unexplained. At the time of writing,
> and nowadays too (although I'd to think that my paper rationalizes
> DeB's story) it was the most widely accepted story for this phenomna.
> The only entities that logically need to be Lorentz invariant are
> the particle. I the deB wave is not a 'Bestandteil' of the
> particle, but of its relations with its envionment, then
> invariance is not defined nor useful.
> M.f.G. Al
> *Gesendet:* Sonntag, 07. Februar 2016 um 14:39 Uhr
> *Von:* "Albrecht Giese" <genmail at a-giese.de>
> *An:* af.kracklauer at web.de
> *Cc:* general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org, "Richard
> Gauthier" <richgauthier at gmail.com>
> *Betreff:* Re: [General] De Broglie Wave
> Hi Al,
>
> thank you for your reference. Your paper has a lot of intelligent
> thoughts but also a lot of additional assumptions. With reference
> to the de Broglie wave, I think, is the situation much simpler on
> the level of conservative knowledge. De Broglie has misunderstood
> relativity (particularly dilation) and so seen a conflict which
> does in fact not exist. He has solved the conflict by inventing an
> additional "fictitious" wave which has no other foundation in
> physics, and also his "theorem of harmonic phases" which as well
> is an invention without need. And his result is in conflict with
> the experiment if we ask for Lorentz invariance or even for
> Galilean invariance. - If we follow the basic idea of de Broglie
> by, however, avoiding his logical error about relativity, we come
> easily to a description of matter waves without logical conflicts.
> This does not need new philosophy or other effort at this level.
>
> Best, Albrecht
>
> Am 06.02.2016 um 03:15 schrieb af.kracklauer at web.de:
>
> Hi Albrecht:
> DeBroglie's verbage is indeed quite rococo! Nonetheless, his
> machinations, although verbalized, in the true tradtion of
> quantum mechanics, mysteriously, can be reinterpreted (i.e.,
> alternate verbage found without changing any of the math) so
> as to tell a fully, if (somewhat) hetrodoxical, story. See
> #11 on www.Nonloco-Physics.0catch.com.
> cc: Waves are never a characteristic of a single, point-like
> entity, but colletive motion of a medium. IF they exist at
> all. My view is that E&M waves are a fiction wrought by
> Fourier analysis. The only real physical part is an
> "interaction", which mnight as well be thought of an absract
> string between charges. Also, neutrons have electric
> multipole moments; i.e., they are totally neutral but not
> charge-free.
> Best, Al
> *Gesendet:* Freitag, 05. Februar 2016 um 21:43 Uhr
> *Von:* "Albrecht Giese" <genmail at a-giese.de>
> *An:* af.kracklauer at web.de,
> general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
> *Cc:* "Richard Gauthier" <richgauthier at gmail.com>
> *Betreff:* Re: [General] De Broglie Wave
> Hi Al,
>
> true, in the frame of the particle the dB wavelength is
> infinite. Because in its own frame the momentum of the
> particle is 0. The particle oscillates with the frequency of
> the particle's Zitterbewegung (which background fields do you
> have in mind? De Brogie does not mention them). This
> oscillation is in no contradiction with this wavelength as the
> phase speed is also infinite. For the imagination, the latter
> means that all points of that wave oscillate with the same
> phase at any point.
>
> Which background waves do you have in mind? What is the
> CNONOICAL momentum? And what about E&M interactions? De
> Broglie has not related his wave to a specific field. An E&M
> field would anyway have no effect in the case of neutron
> scattering for which the same de Broglie formalism is used.
> And into which frame do you see the wave Lorentz-transformed?
>
> So, an electron in his frame has an infinite wavelength and in
> his frame has the double slit moving towards the particle. How
> can an interference at the slits occur? No interference can
> happen under these conditions. But, as I have explained in the
> paper, the normal wave which accompanies the electron by
> normal rules (i.e. phase speed = c) will have an interference
> with its own reflection, which has then a wavelength which
> fits to the expectation of de Broglie. But that is a very
> local event (in a range of approx. 10^-12 m for the electron)
> and it is not at all a property of the electron as de Broglie
> has thought.
>
> To say it again: The de Broglie wavelength cannot be a steady
> property of the particle. But Schrödinger and Dirac have
> incorporated it into their QM equations with this understanding.
>
> If I should have misunderstood you, please show the
> mathematical calculations which you mean.
>
> Ciao, Albrecht
>
> Am 05.02.2016 um 19:20 schrieb af.kracklauer at web.de:
>
> Hi: Albrecht:
> Your arguments don't resonate with me. The deB' wave
> length is infinite in the particles frame: it is the
> standing wave formed by the inpinging background waves
> having a freq. = the particle's Zitterbewegung. If these
> TWO waves are each Lorentz x-formed to another frame and
> added there, they exhibit exactly the DeB' modulation
> wavelength proportional to the particle's momentum. The
> only mysterious feature then is that the proportionality
> is to the CNONICAL momentum, i.e., including the vector
> potential of whatever exterior E&M interactions are
> in-coming. Nevertheless, everything works our without
> contradiction. A particle oscillates in place at its
> Zitter freq. while the Zitter signals are modulated by the
> DeB' wavelength as they move through slits, say.
> ciao, L
> *Gesendet:* Freitag, 05. Februar 2016 um 12:28 Uhr
> *Von:* "Albrecht Giese" <genmail at a-giese.de>
> *An:* "Richard Gauthier" <richgauthier at gmail.com>,
> general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
> *Betreff:* Re: [General] De Broglie Wave
> Hi Richard and Al, hi All,
>
> recently we had a discussion here about two topics:
>
> 1. The functionality of the de Broglie wave, particularly
> its wavelength
> if seen from a different inertial system. Such cases lead
> to illogical
> situations.
> 2. The problem of the apparent asymmetry at relativistic
> dilation.
>
> I have investigated these cases and found that they are in
> some way
> connected. Relativistic dilation is not as simple as it is
> normally
> taken. It looks asymmetric if it is incorrectly treated.
> An asymmetry
> would falsify Special Relativity. But it is in fact
> symmetrical if
> properly handled and understood.
>
> It is funny that both problems are connected to each other
> through the
> fact that de Broglie himself has misinterpreted dilation.
> From this
> incorrect understanding he did not find another way out
> than to invent
> his "theorem of phase harmony"; with all logical conflicts
> resulting
> from this approach.
>
> If relativity is properly understood, the problem seen by
> de Broglie
> does not exist. Equations regarding matter waves can be
> derived which
> work properly, i.e. conform to the experiments but avoid
> the logical
> conflicts.
>
> As announced, I have composed a paper about this. It can
> be found at:
>
> https://www.academia.edu/21564534/The_Conflict_with_the_De_Broglie_Wavelength
> .
>
> I thank Richard Gauthier for the discussion which we had
> about this
> topic. It caused me to investigate the problem and to find
> a solution.
>
> Albrecht
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
> Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren
> geprüft.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
> _______________________________________________
> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the
> Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
> af.kracklauer at web.de
> <a
> href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/af.kracklauer%40web.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
> Click here to unsubscribe
> </a>
>
> Diese E-Mail wurde von einem virenfreien Computer gesendet,
> der von Avast geschützt wird.
> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email>
>
> Diese E-Mail wurde von einem virenfreien Computer gesendet, der
> von Avast geschützt wird.
> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email>
>
> Diese E-Mail wurde von einem virenfreien Computer gesendet, der von
> Avast geschützt wird.
> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email>
>
---
Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20160208/24b914bd/attachment.htm>
More information about the General
mailing list