[General] light light interactions

Wed Aug 30 11:21:42 PDT 2017

“If 2 identical particles, each described by a wave function, collide head on, do they reflect from each other, go thru each other, neither, or both?”
Andrew: I do not know whether you have deliberately set up a “trick question”, or not. QM is not matured enough and our particle-particle scattering data are not exhaustive enough to answer your question in any definitive or closed form.

1.      Colliding particles will do many things; only some of which have been tabulated by the humans! Defining the Impact parameter and the force of interactions for a specific pair of particles is still an on-going research: Starting from Rutherford’s Alpha-Gold foil scattering to any of the latest particle-particle scattering, the impact parameter is a critical issue in determining the interaction process and the nature of the resultant product. And it is very tough for us to quantify this impact parameters, whether zero or, say, 100 nuclear diameter. And for most elementary particles, we are still struggling to find their “effective” diameters, which is different from interaction to interaction. It is an observed fact that “Quantum Mechanical Tunneling” is real. So, it may not even be impossible for certain interactions, one particle may even pass through the other. You have strong background in Nuclear Fission/Fusion. Why does fast neutrons pass right through U-235 nuclei, while slow neutron cause fission?

2.      Wave function does not make a particle a finite or a plane wave: I am thoroughly baffled with the original and still continuing interpretation of Schrodinger exp[-2‘pi’vt], as a “plane wave”, when we know that all atoms and material bodies, built out of elementary particles, always are of finite physical size. The expression, exp[-2‘pi’vt], generically represent the harmonic oscillation-component of any oscillator, propagating wave or a stationary particle. It is the amplitude which we need to understand and visualize. For any propagating wave, we now understand what this “amplitude” physically means – the physical strength of the physical parameter which is oscillating. This is why, for particles, I have proposed, they constitute localized self-looped oscillation of the stationary Complex Tension Field (CTF; old ether in new “bottle”), which constitute our cosmic space. CTF holds 100% of the cosmic energy. EM waves and particles are different kinds of excitations of this same CTF; the energy still resides in the CTF. This is why the law of Conservation of Energy is the supreme rule in our Cosmic System. Uncertainty Principle only indicates that our QM, in spite of its grand successes, is definitely an incomplete/insufficient theory to explain our universe.

I am sorry that I have failed to give you a very succinct answer.

Chandra.

From: General [mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Meulenberg
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2017 7:27 PM
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion; Andrew Meulenberg
Cc: robert hudgins
Subject: Re: [General] light light interactions

Dear Chandra,
I did not read the paper or analyze the announcement in detail, as you did, so your model might still hold for this work.
It did focus your attention so that i could ask you a question "What is your view on identical particles?"

  1.  If 2 identical particles, each described by a wave function, collide head on, do they reflect from each other, go thru each other, neither, or both?
  2.  Would you explain your answer?
  3.  Or, is the question bad, is there insufficient information, or is the result just indeterminate?
How I phrase the next question depends on how you answer the above.
Andrew
_____________________________

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Roychoudhuri, Chandra <chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu<mailto:chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu>> wrote:
Hello Everybody:
I have again looked at the original ATLAS publication. The experiment is a very high energy non-linear phenomenon in the vicinity of highly charged Pb-atoms. As an experimental physicist in the field of optical sciences, I do not find the experiment as generalizable to state “light-by-light scattering” phenomenon. The scattering of high energy Gamma-Gamma wave packets, still in the vicinity of highly-charged, high energy Pb-nuclei, should not be generalized to incorporate the entire band of EM radiation, from radio, to micro, to visible, to X-ray wave packets. [See below the reference to the original paper.]

I do find it sad that the title of the paper uses generalized expression “Evidence for light-by-light scattering…”; instead of calling out that it is a very high energy complex phenomenon. It is susceptible to subjective interpretations of the theory since the interaction of the parameters are quite complex, which are not yet all quantified very well.
In the process, we are pro-actively weakening the platform of “Evidence based science”, which has very serious long-term re-percussions for the entire scientific enterprise.

Of course, the technical content of the paper is scientifically beyond criticism. But, in the age, when the most powerful country is trying to run the world by “twit-headlines”; we need to be a lot more thoughtful!

Chandra.

https://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/vaop/ncurrent/pdf/nphys4208.pdf

Evidence for light-by-light scattering in heavy-ion
collisions with the ATLAS detector at the LHC
ATLAS Collaboration†
Light-by-light scattering (  !  ) is a quantum-mechanical process that is forbidden in the classical theory of
electrodynamics. This reaction is accessible at the Large Hadron Collider thanks to the large electromagnetic field strengths
generated by ultra-relativistic colliding lead ions. Using 480 _b􀀀1 of lead–lead collision data recorded at a centre-of-mass
energy per nucleon pair of 5.02 TeV by the ATLAS detector, here we report evidence for light-by-light scattering. A total of 13
candidate events were observed with an expected background of 2.6 _ 0.7 events. After background subtraction and analysis
corrections, the fiducial cross-section of the process PbCPb (  )!Pb._/CPb(_)  , for photon transverse energy ET>3 GeV,
photon absolute pseudorapidity j_j<2.4, diphoton invariant mass greater than 6 GeV, diphoton transverse momentum lower
than 2 GeV and diphoton acoplanarity below

From: General [mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri<mailto:general-bounces%2Bchandra.roychoudhuri>=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org<mailto:uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>] On Behalf Of Andrew Meulenberg
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2017 10:39 AM
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org<mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>>; Andrew Meulenberg <mules333 at gmail.com<mailto:mules333 at gmail.com>>
Cc: robert hudgins <hudginswr at msn.com<mailto:hudginswr at msn.com>>
Subject: [General] light light interactions

For those who argue against light-light interactions

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2017/aug/18/light-is-seen-to-scatter-off-light

_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at mules333 at gmail.com<mailto:mules333 at gmail.com>
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170830/a2594af6/attachment.htm>