[General] Photon Structure

[ANDREW WORSLEY]

Dear All,


Even a single photon diffraction experiment (detecting no diffraction) would only prove that the fundamental elements making up the photon are tighly bound to 
each other.

Andrew


========================================
Message Received: Feb 06 2017, 12:36 AM
From: "Roychoudhuri, Chandra" 
To: "Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion" 
Cc: 
Subject: Re: [General] Photon Structure

AL:
Like Wolf, I agree with you that we cannot assume the definitive existence of Einstein's (1905) "indivisible light quanta", later named as "Photon". Let me elaborate 
using my hat of an experimentalist.
Photo electron release is a Quantized process; because (i) the electron is a discrete particle and every electron is bound by a specific amount of "quantized" 
energy in the energy band and/or in the sharp level. But, this required energy for the transition, "Delta.E = hv" , can be provided by many different processes, 
including "mechanical", as in collision between Ne-atom and accelerated kinetic electron. Depending upon the velocity of the electron (kinetic energy), the Ne-atom 
could be ionized (release of a discrete electron), or an electron is pushed to the upper "lasing-level"; as we do in He-Ne laser tube. Kinetic electrons are classical 
entities under this circumstance; whereas the Ne atom is a "quantum system". They collaborate very well in energy exchange with simultaneous respect bot the 
classical and quantum mechanics!!!
The key point is that successful Quantum Formalism does not require that a quantum transition can take place only when the energy-donor entity has precisely 
the required quantum of energy to deliver for the transition. This is why none of the QM-fathers have ever formally postulated that any and all quantum transition 
must be facilitated by a quantum donor that matches the recipients required quantum of energy, hv!!!!!
In photo electron release, my current position is that the dipole-complex holding the electron has a characteristic resonant frequency "v". So, an EM wave, 
having this matching frequency, can strongly and linearly stimulate the dipole. The electron then can be released, only if the propagating EM wave field holds more 
than the required "quantum cupful" of energy, "hv" within a 10- to 100-Lamda-cubed volume (v-Lambda = c). If the energy density is less; there will be no quantum 
transition.
If you calculate the power of a laser beam that contains only one single visible "photon"/sec; it would be around 10^-20 watts (please, check my number). 
Nobody, to my knowledge, has done any real "single photon" experiment; where s/he first reduced the beam to a single photon/sec and then carried out the 
interferometry (or any other "single photon" experiment). I request the entire community of "single photon" experimentalists to carry out such a demonstration 
experiment HONESTLY and successfully to re-establish Einstein's' "indivisible light quanta".
I know at least one experimentalist, Emilio Panarella, who showed that when the beam energy density was reduced to the level of "single photon per second", 
he could not register the pinhole diffraction pattern, even after waiting for hundreds of hours.
Why such experiments are so rare? In spite of all the bragging we, the anthropocentric homo sapiens can do; we are very far from accurately and directly 
measuring 10^-20 watts. We do not have that technology as yet. However, we can use a pre-calibrated stack of neutral density filters to easily reduce a mili watt 
beam to this low level (single "photon"/sec). My prediction is that, at such low intensity level, nobody will be able to register any "photon" at all because a quantum 
transition require the presence of an EM wave (besides the RESONANT frequency "v") of energy density, containing more than "hv"-cupful of energy available 
within the vicinity of the resonant quantum dipole, around 10- to 100-Lambda-cubed volume.
I have underscored this point, citing Panarella and my "resonance fluorescence experiments, in my book, "Causal Physics" [now the paperback is available for 
$20 from Amazon.]

Chandra.

From: General [mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of Wolfgang Baer
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2017 2:55 PM
To: general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
Subject: Re: [General] Photon Structure


I agree with Al - we must be very careful to identify what we actually experience from the theoretical inferences derived from those experiences. This is not only 
true of the photo-electric effect but all leaps of faith made when we do not properly take into account the physics of the observing instrument. My paper "Photons as 
Observer Transitions in the Event Oriented World View" SPIE 2015 provides an example of how such leaps of faith may have happened.
Al would you please explain how " the universe of background charges (Olber-like) causes QM effects"
Thanks
wolf


Dr. Wolfgang Baer

Research Director

Nascent Systems Inc.

tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432

E-mail wolf at NascentInc.com
On 2/3/2017 8:01 PM, af.kracklauer at web.de wrote:
Hi Hodge et al.:

The implicit assumptions behind some of your statements here seem to be based on currenty dogma. To get at least the points I have been trying to make, start 
over from the fact that all ostensible observations of E&M "fields" are actually observations of impunged fields on photo electrons, which can be counted (mostly 
after an avalanche ...). The parcelization of the electron is the source of the impression that the cause of its motion is parcelized. This is a leap of logic. In fact, 
per orthodox theory, every electron is always bathed in the interaction (field if you like) of all ether charges in the universe at all times (- to + inf.) because there is 
no off-on switch to Gauss's Law (1/r²). The total effect of the universe of background charges (Olber-like) causes QM effects while the near charges have indiviually 
observable effects described by (mostly) classical E&M theory.

BTW, the word conglomeate "the diffraction of one photon" makes no sense, even in orthodox Q&M, as all that can be observed is actually just one photo-
electron. To see the diffraction pattern requires an ensemble of many such observations so as to see the distribution of single photo-electon responces. Attribution 
of ensemble distribution characteristics to single entities is again an unsupported leap of logic.

Best, Al

Gesendet: Samstag, 04. Februar 2017 um 00:33 Uhr
Von: "Hodge John" 
An: "Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion" 
Betreff: Re: [General] Photon Structure
Hi Al, Chip, Albrecht, Andrew, and John D.

the diffraction experiment with low intensity (one photon in the experiment at a time) produces a diffraction pattern. The pattern characteristics such as the spacing 
of the minima depends on the photon's energy. that is it depends on the photon. in the experiment say between the mask and screen. So it cannot be from all other 
photons in the universe.
Problem, how does the wave / alternations effect the photon. I suggest reflection from matter (mask and screen).
Electric charges are reflected from surfaces (see books o antenna theory). So, it is plausable that such a model could satisfy my photon diffraction experiment. 
Slight changes in my equations would probably yield the same solution. I chose the gravity wave model to unite it with GR, to allow spin=1, and to yield the 
polarization of photons in magnetic fields.
Hodge
--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 2/3/17, John Macken  wrote:

Subject: Re: [General] Photon Structure
To: "'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'" , 
phys at a-giese.de
Date: Friday, February 3, 2017, 3:30 PM






_______________________________________________

If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at 
Wolf at nascentinc.com

>

Click here to unsubscribe