"Electromagnetic waves" do NOT EXIST!!!

martillo · 06-09-2008

C1ay:
I knew it would not satisfy you.
I think is right, may be need polishment and perfectioning to match all mathematic rigourosities but is fine for now.

By the way, the theory is under development and some things remains to be solved. If you want it all ready just sit and wait, is just a matter of time, now I'm looking for those that could contribute with something.

C1ay · 06-09-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by martillo

Finally it can be then stated that the "electromagnetic waves" derived from Maxwell's equations cannot exist.

Done.

Quote:

Originally Posted by martillo

I think is right, may be need polishment and perfectioning to match all mathematic rigourosities but is fine for now.

By the way, the theory is under development and some things remains to be solved. If you want it all ready just sit and wait, is just a matter of time, now I'm looking for those that could contribute with something.

Ahh. It looks like you are beginning to see the difference of declaring finality with the realization of work to be done.

Zythryn · 06-09-2008

martillo, does your thought claim make any predictions or suggest any experiments?
i.e. how do you propose to test your claims?

martillo · 06-09-2008

Zythryn:

Quote:

martillo, does your thought claim make any predictions or suggest any experiments?
i.e. how do you propose to test your claims?

In relation to the "electromagnetic waves" I have no more predictions than the Emission theory of light have. I have an experiment that can prove something and is a modification of Feynman double slit experiment. Section 4.6 states that the experiment fails in the assumption that only one photon is emitted at each single "event", that actually a "burst" of short trains of photons are emitted simultaneously, separated by the slits and interacting at the target producing the diffracion patterns. At the main page is suggested that the experiment must include a way to determine how many photons are really present at each event, I don't know exactly how to do that but for example measuring the total energy of the emissions with LEDs that I know exist to detect the real energy of many incoming photons and electrons.
This will prove at least part of the claims.
But I think that the non existency of electromagnetic waves can be demonstrated theoretically in the way I was following...

Actually the theory is much more larger and I didn't have (and don't have)much time to analize predictions. I also suggest another experiment that can prove a great part of the theories and is a modification of the well known Davisson-Germer experiment (Chapter Six). It is suggested to add a velocity detector to determine the real velocity of the electrons in spite of measuring the voltage of the accelerating plates with a voltmeter because under the new theory theory wrong results are obtained in this way at high velocities (greater thabn those used in the original experiment)...
You know I cannot answer completely your question in a post.
I suggest you to visit my site to see what I really propose and suggest: A New Light In Physics

About general predictions I think that the new theory would predict (although I'm not totally sure) that many of the predictions of the current "Modern Physics (which I know only by what I could see on TV) have no sense: I mean: "Big Bang", "worm-holes" (time/space travel), "black holes", "dark matter", parallel Universes!, all these things have no sense in the new theory which is strongly based in Classical Physics. All these are for me just logical conclusions but from wrong theories and so they are wrong.
May be new predictions could souge but I don't have time now to analize that seriously. You know I work eight hours a day with computers and networks, sometimes getting tired at the end of the day, usually I have only times at night to for example participate in forums like this one.
I did a hard work, may be I did the "dirty work", now is time for others to take my work and develop it further towards a new Physics...

Zythryn · 06-09-2008

Martillo, you are giving far more information and depth than I asked for. I appreciate the detail but let's try to keep things simple.
You stated:

Quote:

I have an experiment that can prove something and is a modification of Feynman double slit experiment.

That is an excellent start. Now, how did you modify the Feynman double slit experiment.
What results would your hypothesis predict that your experiment would give you.
Is there any results that would disprove your hypothesis?

martillo · 06-10-2008

Zythryn:

Quote:

That is an excellent start. Now, how did you modify the Feynman double slit experiment.
What results would your hypothesis predict that your experiment would give you.
Is there any results that would disprove your hypothesis?

I would work with "PIN diode detectors" which I know can detect the energy of incoming photons and electrons wich is very suitable for Feynman's experiment. PIN diode detectors are used for example in Nuclear Medicine (my wife works in a "Gamma chamber") to detect the total intensity of photons reaching the detectors allowing a graphic of the intensity of photons (quantity) with each specific energy (energy spectrum).

Then I would use mobile detectors inside Feynman's apparatus which can be setted in some position to detect "what is coming" and moved away to let the "thing" pass getting the normal Feynman experiment. One detector before the slits to detect what is emitted by the emisor, two in front of each slit to detect "what" pass through the slits and may be one final one to detect "what" is reaching the target and if the detector can detect it or not (the theory predicts that very "compact" trains of photons are produced in the "destructive interference" places such a way they pass through the target without producing any photoelectric effect).
Now you can move the detectors from the path of the particles to get normal Feynman's experiment and you can determine by the diffraction pattern which kind of photons are working (emitted) in the experiment . You can determine the wavelenght and so also their specific energy.
After you run the experiment in the same conditions but moving the PIN diode detectors one by one to the detection points to get "what" is passing in the specific places.
It is predicted by the new theory that not individual photons will pass through those places but several photons in trains arrangments. If energies bigger than those of the diffraction patterns are obtained it will demonstrates that several photons are emitted at each "single event" (each discrete emission) proving the proposition that short trains of photons are really emitted.
If not, if the energy obtained in the detectors are the same as that obtained for the photons through the diffraction patterns then it would be a final proof that individual photons are emitted at each discrete event and my theory must be discarded as a wrong theory.
Feasible isn't it?
I'm just waiting for someone with the necessary resources and interest to perform that experiment...

modest · 06-10-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by martillo

Zythryn:

I would work with "PIN diode detectors" which I know can detect the energy of incoming photons and electrons wich is very suitable for Feynman's experiment.

There are cameras sensitive enough to detect a single photon.(1) (2)

No one here is fooled. Your prediction fails regularly. Also, the fact that there is an interference pattern at all means light has a wave nature. This is true even if more than one photon is passing through the double slit at a time. Why would you propose photons as particles would interfere with each other? You are attacking the entire knowledge base of quantum mechanics with nothing more than a failed and improperly derived prediction. No one is fooled.