Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS

On Mar 16, 4:47 pm, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spam...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
AEF wrote:
F A B

[-LASER-]-----|-------\-----------------\
| |
| |
| - LCD
| |
| |
\-----------------\

C D

Considering the wavelength of light, I doubt very much that you can
setup a rig with mirrors where the A-B-D path is *exactly* the same
length as the A-C-D path, down to a point where you may need to consider
coriolis effect due to rotation of the earth. So when you wonder about
interference being created, you need to first look at yourvery crude
equipment such as the wave splitter and mirrors and the requireement
that they be absolutely precicely positioned. Also, when going through
the wave splitter, you'd need to ensure that the path FAC and FAB would
go through the exact same amount of material in the splitter. (down to
atomic level), and have exactly the same amount of refraction etc etc.

Re: predicting whether a photon at A will turn right or go straigth:

Just because it appears random to us and you can't really predict it
doesn't mean there isn't a logic to it. If the photon hits a reflective
atom at A, he will turn right towards C. If it passes between 2
reflective atoms, it will continue straight towards B.

This is the "reflective spots on the glass" theory. But it's not true
because you can polish glass. It's also not true because you cannot
get the observed interference patterns from spots. See the Feynman
video to see why.


We may not have any equipment to see/measure this, but there is still
some logic behind it, it isn't all "random".

Nope. The whole point is that the photon does not take a definite path
until you measure it with the LCD on. If that weren't true, you
wouldn't get the interference patterns with the LCD off. If you could
always predict which way the photon goes, it would take that definite
path and you would never get the interference patterns with the LCD
off. You simply cannot determine the path of the photon from A to D,
either before or after it passes through the beam splitter A, and
still get an interference pattern. Since the LCD can be switched while
the photon is in mid-flight, you cannot determine a definite path for
it until it reaches the LCD and only if the LCD is ON at that moment.
Therefore, there is no way, EVEN IN PRINCIPLE, to predict which way
the photon goes from A. It is not a limitation of our tools; it is a
basic feature of Nature.

It is a little like saying you can't divide by zero only because of a
limitation of our computing skills. It is an intrinsic property of
division. It's like asking what's north of the North Pole.

To all readers:

I'll not have Internet access for the next few days. I'll respond to
any responses when I return.

Take care.

AEF
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS
    ... the wave splitter, you'd need to ensure that the path FAC and FAB would ... Re: predicting whether a photon at A will turn right or go straigth: ... But you *do* see interference patterns with the LCD OFF, ... traveled determinable paths. ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS
    ... Feynman for the explanation of why you cannot even in principle ... predict which path the photon will take even if the LCD is ON. ... take after passing through the beam splitter A with the LCD ON? ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: Pioneer anomaly
    ... I find those waves expanding and causing interference patterns that ... Those interference patterns define a plane in which they ... green lines perpendicular to the ray. ... photon) at this point. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS
    ... Correction to the laser-LCD experiment analysis: ... that it can be switched AFTER the photon passes through A but BEFORE ... the photon reaches it (the LCD). ... If you switch the LCD from OFF to ON while the ...
    (comp.os.vms)