<html><head></head><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif;font-size:16px"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2587"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
</div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2703">Wolf:</div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2704"> </div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2705">Please send links to your papers. We and Reiter seem to have
similar goals - replace QM. Therefore, the Theory of Everything is a basic
Newtonian/ Gr model (matter warps space, space directs matter) which is my
STOE. <br></div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2706"> </div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2707">I think you are asking a question about my line of thinking.
</div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2708"> </div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2709">I have suggested the principle that the universe is fractal
(self similar) on all scales. That is, the quantum world should obey the same
equations as our everyday world. The scale difference then requires new models
to show the similarity. The QM model and its bizarre models such as
wave-particle duality and entanglement need to be re-addressed in everyday
terms. That is what the STOE attempts. </div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2710">I developed the STOE model (in many, sometimes long papers)
to explain Young’s Experiment by a calculating model of photons - Now achieved
(I hope). Now experiments are necessary.</div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2711"> </div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2712">I think the Hodge Experiment can distinguish between wave
and particle. The STOE is needed now because it presents a model. The next need
is to do the experiment with a known (read in our everyday size world) wave
such as water and a known particle such as the walking drop of the Bush
reference. If these observation are different, the separation of the experiment
from the STOE would be achieved (given the self similar principle). I’m
thinking of building a water tank. But that is looking problematic for me. </div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2713"> </div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2714">Yes, electron diffraction does present some issues. However,
the following may have a way to produce the desired pattern as the first mask.
It seems a second such arrangement may be able to make the second mask with a
real slit to form the selection followed by another interferometer to produce
the resultant pattern. I haven’t looked into it thoroughly because I don’t have
the equipment. </div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2715"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2716" style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span></div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2717" style="margin-left:.5in">A. Tonomura, J. Endo, T. Matsuda,
T. Kawasaki and H. Ezawa, "Demonstration of Single-Electron Buildup of an
Interference Pattern,"Amer. J. Phys. 57 (1989) pp.117-120.</div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2718">Do you think such a thing can be done? I think the usual
diffraction of electrons through crystals is probably impractical.</div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2719"> </div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2720">The STOE postulates there are just 2 constituents (after
Democritus) and their interaction in our universe - particles (hods) and plenum
- names given because their properties dictate their interaction. Hods warp
plenum (like “space” GR got something there) and plenum directs hods trajectory
(GR and Bohm).</div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2721"> </div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2722">EM radiation results from electron moving on a metal rod
(antenna). What is radiated - particles that then hit the detectors or plenum
waves that then cause electrons in the detector to move? Whatever charge is
must be indicated by the EM radiation. For example, if charge is a
characteristic of particles - what characteristic - their shape, any
oscillations. If charge is a plenum characteristic (your resonate antenna
effect. The STOE suggests ``entanglement’’ is a resonate-plenum-effect on
matter.), what character - wavelength, combination of frequencies? How does
this make electron neg. and positron +?</div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2723"> </div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2724"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2725" style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"">Why need a photon? Because the goal is to refute
QM. Many papers (years) ago - the need was to form a basic model to address QM
in everyday terms - wave or particle. ``</span><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2726" style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"">A single model of light has remained a mystery. Black body
radiation, the photoelectric effect, and the Compton effect observations reject
the wave-in-space model of light. The reflection, diffraction, interference,
polarization, and spectrographic observations reject the traditional particle
model of light.’’ To refute QM, either (1) a wave model of the Black body
radiation, the photoelectric effect, or the Compton effect needed to be
developed or (2) a particle model of reflection, diffraction, interference,
polarization, or spectrographic effects needed to be developed. I thought along
both lines for a time. I thought I saw a way forward with the particle in
Young’s Experiment. It seems to be working. </span></div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2727"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2728" style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho""> </span></div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2729"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2730" style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"">Your
question on the-resonate-effect-on-an-absorber is a possible alternate if the
EM has to be a wave. </span></div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2731"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2732" style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho""> </span></div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2733"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2734" style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"">If a photon
model is not acceptable or you want resonate effects of waves, then a model of
Black body radiation, the photoelectric effect should be developed. Actually,
given the hod/plenum concept, this doesn’t seem impossible. A resonate effect
could look like a particle result in an experiment (is that your point). But
the photon is easier, or so I thought. </span></div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2735"> </div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2736">The ``wave model of light’’ suggests a wave going through
the slit that then forms the diffraction pattern. Very straight forward. But
suppose the goal is to have a (single) particle going through the slit. What
directs it? Young’s Experiment and the walking drop suggest an edge effect. If
the particle is between the mask and screen, what directs it?</div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2737">In the walking drop experiment (BTW this is the experiment
that suggested I try for a particle model for the wave observation) there is no
wave coming through the slit to direct the drop and the drop does change
direction after the slit. Because plenum (gravitational) waves direct matter
(GR), very specific plenum waves are required to direct the photons after the
slit. The only source for wave source is the moving photon. Hence, the need to
reflect (which also gives us the QM effect of observer/wires/equipment on the
experiment - one less peculiarity to worry about which implies a simplification
to the overall model). </div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2738"> </div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2739"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2740" style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"">Part of the claim is that the STOE describes
Young’s Experiment with a particle model, then shows a difference with the wave
model (side of illumination). ``</span><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2741" style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"">The math of the full slit, diffraction experiment for STOE
particles with plenum inertia can be mathematically transformed into the
Fraunhofer wave model with HF assumptions \citep[Section 4]{hodg15a}.’’ ``The
STOE model of particles and the wave model of a continuous medium yield indistinguishable
results for the screen image in the traditional diffraction experiment.’’
However, the claim needs to be supported with further experiment. The water
experiment should do this (1) show Fraunhofer diffraction on second mask
position, (2) show Fraunhofer diffraction on screen when second mask is
centered, (3) move second mask so slit has varying illumination, and (4) see
most energy on the same side. </span></div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2742"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2743" style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho""> </span></div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2744"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2745" style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"">The rational
for doing the Experiment was that the STOE model suggested a difference between
a wave model and the STOE model (Fig. 1 in the first paper you commented) while
showing indistinguishable results for Young’s Experiment. </span></div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2746"> </div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2747">Did this (long) message answer your last query?</div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2748"> </div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2749">Hodge</div>
<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1461606788707_2750"> </div><div dir="ltr">
</div></div></body></html>