# In a double slit experiment it is the dark matter that waves



## mpc755 (Aug 13, 2014)

'What If There's a Way to Explain Quantum Physics Without the Probabilistic Weirdness?'
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...stic-weirdness-180951914/#JEoZGUo23dbMGJly.16

_"Known as “pilot wave theory” this line of thinking goes that, rather than electrons and other things being both quasi-particles and quasi-waves, the electron is a discrete particle that is being carried along by a separate wave. What this wave is made of no one knows."_

'Redefining Dark Matter - Wave Instead Of Particle'
http://www.science20.com/news_articles/redefining_dark_matter_wave_instead_of_particle-139771

_"Tom Broadhurst, an Ikerbasque researcher at the University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), explains that, "guided by the initial simulations of the formation of galaxies in this context, we have reinterpreted cold dark matter as a Bose-Einstein condensate". So, "the ultra-light bosons forming the condensate share the same quantum wave function, so disturbance patterns are formed on astronomic scales in the form of large-scale waves"."

"This opens up the possibility that dark matter could be regarded as a very cold quantum fluid"_

Dark matter is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.

A moving particle has an associated dark matter displacement wave.

In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and the associated wave in the dark matter passes through both.


----------



## Steevo (Aug 16, 2014)

Except the collapse of the wave when observed.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 16, 2014)

Steevo said:


> Except the collapse of the wave when observed.



'Interpretation of quantum mechanics by the double solution theory - Louis de BROGLIE'
http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-classiques/aflb124p001.pdf

_“When in 1923-1924 I had my first ideas about Wave Mechanics I was looking for a truly concrete physical image, valid for all particles, of the wave and particle coexistence discovered by Albert Einstein in his "Theory of light quanta". I had no doubt whatsoever about the physical reality of waves and particles.”_

_“any particle, even isolated, has to be imagined as in continuous “energetic contact” with a hidden medium”_

The hidden medium of de Broglie wave mechanics is the dark matter. The _“energetic contact”_ is the state of displacement of the dark matter.

_"For me, the particle, precisely located in space at every instant, forms on the v wave a small region of high energy concentration, which may be likened in a first approximation, to a moving singularity."_

A particle may be likened in a first approximation to a moving singularity which has an associated dark matter displacement wave.

_"the particle is defined as a very small region of the wave"_

Particles of matter move through and displace the dark matter.

A moving particle has an associated dark matter displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and the associated wave in the dark matter passes through both. As the wave exits the slits it creates wave interference. As the particle exits a single slit the direction it travels is altered by the wave interference. This is the wave guiding the particle. Strongly detecting the particle destroys the cohesion between the particle and its associated wave, the particle continues on the trajectory it was traveling and it does not form an interference pattern.

_"While the founding fathers agonized over the question 'particle' or 'wave', de Broglie in 1925 proposed the obvious answer 'particle' and 'wave'. Is it not clear from the smallness of the scintillation on the screen that we have to do with a particle? And is it not clear, from the diffraction and interference patterns, that the motion of the particle is directed by a wave? De Broglie showed in detail how the motion of a particle, passing through just one of two holes in screen, could be influenced by waves propagating through both holes. And so influenced that the particle does not go where the waves cancel out, but is attracted to where they cooperate. This idea seems to me so natural and simple, to resolve the wave-particle dilemma in such a clear and ordinary way, that it is a great mystery to me that it was so generally ignored."_ - John Bell


----------



## Steevo (Aug 16, 2014)

I believe I understand that, and have been doing some brain exercise to the end of; at the most basic form everything we know is a vibrating 3D volume of energy, and what we call matter is the coalescence of those vibrations in harmonic standing waves of this medium, thus the absorption and redistribution of energy as shown here http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae605.cfm is possible as perhaps a yet unmeasurable change to this volume occurs, and also why quantum entanglement works. Dark matter and the gravitational interactions being explained as large "pools" of this standing wave cause the volume to warp and gravity to appear, and depending on the sensitivity of the measurement even small particles experience gravity.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 16, 2014)

Steevo said:


> I believe I understand that, and have been doing some brain exercise to the end of; at the most basic form everything we know is a vibrating 3D volume of energy, and what we call matter is the coalescence of those vibrations in harmonic standing waves of this medium, thus the absorption and redistribution of energy as shown here http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae605.cfm is possible as perhaps a yet unmeasurable change to this volume occurs, and also why quantum entanglement works. Dark matter and the gravitational interactions being explained as large "pools" of this standing wave cause the volume to warp and gravity to appear, and depending on the sensitivity of the measurement even small particles experience gravity.



The Milky Way's dark matter halo is not a clump of stuff traveling along with the Milky Way. The Milky Way is moving through and displacing the dark matter.

Dark matter and aether are labels used for the mass which fills the space unoccupied by particles of matter.

Particles of matter move through and displace the dark matter/aether; including particles as large as the Milky Way.

'Comment on the higher derivative Lagrangians in relativistic theory' 
http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.5759 

_"Einstein theory of gravitational fields and this gives a new perspective on the Mach principle revisiting the “absolute” acceleration concept as a natural motion in space-time deformed by the matter-energy contained therein. We refer the reader to the paper of Einstein on a related topic [9]. The relativistic theory of an Aether was discussed several time, see for e.g. [8], [9]. In this paper, our hypothesis is different and gives a relativistic theory of the deformation of continuous media (for which the geometry is described by the metric field)." _

The Milky Way's halo is the deformation of continuous media.

The Milky Way's halo is the defromation of spacetime.

The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether.

What is referred to geometrically as deformed spacetime is the state of displacement of the aether.


----------



## Steevo (Aug 16, 2014)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson-Morley_experiment


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 16, 2014)

Steevo said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson-Morley_experiment



The Michelson-Morley experiment looked for an absolutely stationary space the Earth moves through. The aether is not an absolutely stationary space. Particles of matter move through and displace the aether.

A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment it is the aether that waves.


----------



## Steevo (Aug 16, 2014)

And when it is observed it does what to the aether waves? Creating a theory means looking for reasons its wrong, not, how can we make the data fit our theory.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 16, 2014)

Steevo said:


> And when it is observed it does what to the aether waves? Creating a theory means looking for reasons its wrong, not, how can we make the data fit our theory.



When you strongly detect the particle you destroy its cohesion with its associated wave, the particle continues on the trajectory it was traveling and it doesn't form an interference pattern.

'1st place: Shifting the morals of quantum measurement'
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article...rld-reveals-its-top-10-breakthroughs-for-2011

_"Using an emerging technique called "weak measurement", the team is the first to track the average paths of single photons passing through a Young's double-slit experiment – something that Steinberg says physicists had been "brainwashed" into thinking is impossible."_

'Quantum mechanics rule 'bent' in classic experiment'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13626587

_'For his part, Professor Steinberg believes that the result reduces a limitation not on quantum physics but on physicists themselves. "I feel like we're starting to pull back a veil on what nature really is," he said. "The trouble with quantum mechanics is that while we've learned to calculate the outcomes of all sorts of experiments, we've lost much of our ability to describe what is really happening in any natural language. I think that this has really hampered our ability to make progress, to come up with new ideas and see intuitively how new systems ought to behave."'_

'New 'Double Slit' Experiment Skirts Uncertainty Principle'
http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...-slit-experiment-skirts-uncertainty-principle

_"Intriguingly, the trajectories closely match those predicted by an unconventional interpretation of quantum mechanics known as pilot-wave theory, in which each particle has a well-defined trajectory that takes it through one slit while the associated wave passes through both slits."_

A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit. It is the associated wave which passes through both. As the wave exits the slits it creates wave interference. As the particle exits a single slit the direction it travels is altered by the wave interference. This is the wave guiding the particle. Strongly detecting the particle causes a loss of cohesion between the particle and its associated wave, the particle continues on the trajectory it was traveling and it does not form an interference pattern.

What waves in a double slit experiment is the aether.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 16, 2014)

'The pilot-wave dynamics of walking droplets









'Yves Couder Explains Wave/Particle Duality via Silicon Droplets [Through the Wormhole]'


----------



## Steevo (Aug 17, 2014)

Neither of those are quantum level, they just very closely resemble the actions at quantum level, and again, as mentioned in the articles, more testing needs to be done before we can say for certain this is the cause.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 17, 2014)

Steevo said:


> Neither of those are quantum level, they just very closely resemble the actions at quantum level, and again, as mentioned in the articles, more testing needs to be done before we can say for certain this is the cause.



In a double slit experiment the particle is always physically detected traveling through a single slit because it always physically travels through a single slit. It is the associated wave in the aether which passes through both.


----------



## Steevo (Aug 17, 2014)

Polarized glasses.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 17, 2014)

'Fluid Tests Hint at Concrete Quantum Reality'
http://www.simonsfoundation.org/quanta/20140624-fluid-tests-hint-at-concrete-quantum-reality/

_"Some enthusiasts think the fluid approach could indeed be the key to resolving the long-standing conflict between quantum mechanics and Einstein’s theory of gravity, which clash at infinitesimal scales.

“The possibility exists that we can look for a unified theory of the Standard Model and gravity in terms of an underlying, superfluid substrate of reality,” said Ross Anderson, a computer scientist and mathematician at the University of Cambridge in England, and the co-author of a recent paper on the fluid-quantum analogy. In the future, Anderson and his collaborators plan to study the behavior of “rotons” (particle-like excitations) in superfluid helium as an even closer analog of this possible “superfluid model of reality.”

But at present, these connections with quantum gravity are speculative, and for young researchers, risky ideas. Bush, Couder and the other fluid dynamicists hope that their demonstrations of a growing number of quantum-like phenomena will make a deterministic, fluid picture of quantum mechanics increasingly convincing.

“With physicists it’s such a controversial thing, and people are pretty noncommittal at this stage,” Bush said. “We’re just forging ahead, and time will tell. The truth wins out in the end.”"_

What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment; the superfluid substrate.

Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie wave of wave-particle duality; both are waves in the superfluid substrate.

The superfluid substrate displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.

The Milky Way's dark matter halo is not a clump of stuff traveling along with the Milky Way. The Milky Way is moving through and displace the superfluid substrate.

The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the superfluid substrate.


----------



## Steevo (Aug 18, 2014)

It is interesting reading for sure, but the issue with the wave guided particle is polarization, how do we make known particle observations allow for a phenomenon we use in everyday life?

The underlying answer may be that they are not actually particles, but, the accumulation of vibrations of fundamental strings that may comprise dark matter, which when it interacts with other accumulated matter (fundamental vibrating strings) what we see as particles is the wave interaction. We could say two up quarks and one down quark is the harmonic vibration of two rising parts of the string and one lowering, and then the particle changes state, and these harmonic vibrations are what makes accumulations of protons, neutrons, and electrons stable or unstable, as well as the popping into and out of existence of matter as calculated by observed quantum physics.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 18, 2014)

In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and the associated wave in the aether passes through both.


----------



## Steevo (Aug 18, 2014)

If it is a particle when what creates the interference pattern? And how does polarization work then?


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 18, 2014)

Steevo said:


> If it is a particle when what creates the interference pattern? And how does polarization work then?



A moving particle has an associated dark matter displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and the associated wave in the dark matter passes through both. As the wave exits the slits it creates wave interference. As the particle exits a single slit the direction it travels is altered by the wave interference. This is the wave guiding the particle. The wave guiding the particle is what creates the interference pattern. Strongly detecting the particle destroys the cohesion between the particle and its associated wave, the particle continues on the trajectory it was traveling and it does not form an interference pattern.

_"While the founding fathers agonized over the question 'particle' or 'wave', de Broglie in 1925 proposed the obvious answer 'particle' and 'wave'. Is it not clear from the smallness of the scintillation on the screen that we have to do with a particle? And is it not clear, from the diffraction and interference patterns, that the motion of the particle is directed by a wave? De Broglie showed in detail how the motion of a particle, passing through just one of two holes in screen, could be influenced by waves propagating through both holes. And so influenced that the particle does not go where the waves cancel out, but is attracted to where they cooperate. This idea seems to me so natural and simple, to resolve the wave-particle dilemma in such a clear and ordinary way, that it is a great mystery to me that it was so generally ignored."_ - John Bell


----------



## Steevo (Aug 18, 2014)

Except when the photon detectors were left on, but recording medium was removed the interference pattern remained, so the idea of strong or weak detection is flawed.










http://physicsworld.com/cws/article...rld-reveals-its-top-10-breakthroughs-for-2011

I will have to do more research, but changing the experiment to fit their idea is what it seems like, instead of firing a single photon through a vacuum, and allowing a probability wave to form, they split it and it is forced down either fiber optic cable, then once it reaches the end the only way they know which way it went is by passing it through a weak detector, AKA calcite film then they stop measuring it, until it hits the CCD, at which time they proclaim it has traveled from the right or left and usually hits the same side of the screen. 

https://web.archive.org/web/2012032...sion_3E/Kocsis_Observing_the_Trajectories.pdf

This is their paper.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 18, 2014)

Steevo said:


> Except when the photon detectors were left on, but recording medium was removed the interference pattern remained, so the idea of strong or weak detection is flawed.



I'm not watching an hour long video.

Idea of strong and weak detection is not flawed.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 18, 2014)

Steevo said:


> http://physicsworld.com/cws/article...rld-reveals-its-top-10-breakthroughs-for-2011
> 
> I will have to do more research, but changing the experiment to fit their idea is what it seems like, instead of firing a single photon through a vacuum, and allowing a probability wave to form, they split it and it is forced down either fiber optic cable, then once it reaches the end the only way they know which way it went is by passing it through a weak detector, AKA calcite film then they stop measuring it, until it hits the CCD, at which time they proclaim it has traveled from the right or left and usually hits the same side of the screen.
> 
> ...



The photon travels along the fiber optic cable through one slit or the other. You can't know which slit without detecting the photon. The associated wave in the aether travels along both fiber optic cables through both slits.


----------



## Steevo (Aug 18, 2014)

At this point I will have to say I will wait and see, a lot of ideas and tests have been done only to find the reason something happened was for entirely different reasons, and or sensitivity of sensors or other devices wasn't good enough, or some just manipulated the data. Since we haven't seen any quantum breakthroughs about this since his test was done I am unconvinced and will leave it at that until more peer reviewed data becomes available.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 18, 2014)

Or, you could understand the reason why the particle is always detected traveling through a single slit is because it always travels through a single slit.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 20, 2014)

'An Extended Dynamical Equation of Motion, Phase Dependency and Inertial Backreaction'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1208.3458

_"Although Einstein in the frame of the special theory of relativity disregarded the notion of absolute space, he returned to this concept later when formulating his general theory of relativity, by the spacetime metric gµ,ν, showing that spacetime has a geometrical structure, and claiming that empty space should be called the “the new aether of the general relativity” [25] (see also Ref. [26])."_

"The new aether of general relativity" is the "hidden medium" of de Broglie's wave mechanics and double solution theory.

Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality; both are waves in the aether.

What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment; the aether.

Aether displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.


----------



## bnjohanson (Aug 20, 2014)

Steevo said:


> I believe I understand that, and have been doing some brain exercise to the end of; at the most basic form everything we know is a vibrating 3D volume of energy, and what we call matter is the coalescence of those vibrations in harmonic standing waves of this medium, thus the absorption and redistribution of energy as shown here http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae605.cfm is possible as perhaps a yet unmeasurable change to this volume occurs, and also why quantum entanglement works. Dark matter and the gravitational interactions being explained as large "pools" of this standing wave cause the volume to warp and gravity to appear, and depending on the sensitivity of the measurement even small particles experience gravity.



"... as perhaps a yet unmeasurable change to this volume occurs, and also why quantum entanglement works."

Wait, what? Please clarify your perceived reasoning supporting how Quantum Entanglement works? ...I have to hear this...if successful, you easily qualify for review for The Nobel Prize...


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 20, 2014)

bnjohanson said:


> "... as perhaps a yet unmeasurable change to this volume occurs, and also why quantum entanglement works."
> 
> Wait, what? Please clarify your perceived reasoning supporting how Quantum Entanglement works? ...I have to hear this...if successful, you easily qualify for review for The Nobel Prize...



'The pilot-wave dynamics of walking droplets'









At the 2:00 minute mark it discusses walking droplets as an exposed variable theory.

I think the whole notion of non-locality and hidden variables is a red herring.

In order for there to be conservation of momentum, downconverted photon pairs are created with opposite angular momentums.

Each of the downconverted photons "knows" their own position and momentum from the time of their creation. With this information, and due to conservation of momentum, they are able to determine the position and momentum of the pair.

It doesn't matter what is hidden, or not, to us.

What is important is, due to conservation of momentum, at the time of detection of one of the pair the position and momentum of the other is "knowable".

They are not physically or superluminally connected.

They are connected as at the time of their detection, each of the pair "knows" the position and momentum of the other.


----------



## bnjohanson (Aug 20, 2014)

mpc755 said:


> 'The pilot-wave dynamics of walking droplets'
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I see what you are saying...and I understand from the measurement/observational standpoint the results....but what and how is "it knowable" to the particles themselves and how is it their spin corresponds instantaneously despite their distance....and 100% of the time? ...and if what you are saying, this is preconceived at the point of them becoming defined as pairs, ...how is this preconceived? If I am missing something i.e. via your point of this being supported by the conservation of momentum, I apologize; but I have been stirring over this forever and have up to this point "fear" that this principal of Quantum Entanglement opens-up an entirely new Pandora's Box not only in terms of the affect of consciousness from the point of observation/measurement, but the plethora of potential other sources that cause for these affects, whether inter-dimensional, something to do with "God', etc.....


----------



## bnjohanson (Aug 20, 2014)

bnjohanson said:


> I see what you are saying...and I understand from the measurement/observational standpoint the results....but what and how is "it knowable" to the particles themselves and how is it their spin corresponds instantaneously despite their distance....and 100% of the time? ...and if what you are saying, this is preconceived at the point of them becoming defined as pairs, ...how is this preconceived? If I am missing something i.e. via your point of this being supported by the conservation of momentum, I apologize; but I have been stirring over this forever and have up to this point "fear" that this principal of Quantum Entanglement opens-up an entirely new Pandora's Box not only in terms of the affect of consciousness from the point of observation/measurement, but the plethora of potential other sources that cause for these affects, whether inter-dimensional, something to do with "God', etc.....





...or maybe I am over-complicating this and must accept this as features of the pairs at the point when they are created with opposite angular momentums.


----------



## bnjohanson (Aug 20, 2014)

bnjohanson said:


> ...or maybe I am over-complicating this and must accept this as features of the pairs at the point when they are created with opposite angular momentums.


...but wait a second, this also has to support their change in spin and corresponding instantaneously regardless of distance and this "knowable" feature is transmitted faster than the speed of light as well.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 20, 2014)

bnjohanson said:


> I see what you are saying...and I understand from the measurement/observational standpoint the results....but what and how is "it knowable" to the particles themselves and how is it their spin corresponds instantaneously despite their distance....and 100% of the time? ...and if what you are saying, this is preconceived at the point of them becoming defined as pairs, ...how is this preconceived? If I am missing something i.e. via your point of this being supported by the conservation of momentum, I apologize; but I have been stirring over this forever and have up to this point "fear" that this principal of Quantum Entanglement opens-up an entirely new Pandora's Box not only in terms of the affect of consciousness from the point of observation/measurement, but the plethora of potential other sources that cause for these affects, whether inter-dimensional, something to do with "God', etc.....



The spin corresponds due to conservation of momentum.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 20, 2014)

bnjohanson said:


> ...but wait a second, this also has to support their change in spin and corresponding instantaneously regardless of distance and this "knowable" feature is transmitted faster than the speed of light as well.



Nothing is transmitted. Due to conservation of momentum they are created with opposite angular momemtums. This "knowledge" does not have to be transmitted. It is already known by each of the pair. Each of the pair know their state so they know the state of each other.

The pair are not superluminally or physically connected. They are connected as they know each others state. They know each others state due to conservation of momentum and their knowing of their own state.

You have a pair of quarters. They are always detected as opposite. You toss the quarters. It doesn't matter if those quarters spin for the next 100 light years. If you detect one as a head that quarter "knows" the other will be a tail.


----------



## bnjohanson (Aug 20, 2014)

mpc755 said:


> The spin corresponds due to conservation of momentum.



...am I incorrect in that if one of the particle's spin of the pair is reversed than the other particle reverses instantaneously as well...all of this post its original corresponding to the pair's conservation of momentum?


----------



## bnjohanson (Aug 20, 2014)

bnjohanson said:


> ...am I incorrect in that if one of the particle's spin of the pair is reversed than the other particle reverses instantaneously as well...all of this post its original corresponding to the pair's conservation of momentum?




thanks.

...I am the typical sad story that wishes I had the insight to study this early on instead of striving to do so now at 43-years old and as a mere hobbyist.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 20, 2014)

bnjohanson said:


> ...am I incorrect in that if one of the particle's spin of the pair is reversed than the other particle reverses instantaneously as well...all of this post its original corresponding to the pair's conservation of momentum?



No, if you reverse the spin of one it does not reverse the spin of the other. They are not physically or superluminally connected. Due to conservation of momentum they are created with opposite polarizations. They are propagating as exact opposites. The mathematics of quantum mechanics applies to the pair as they are propagating with opposite angular momentums.


----------



## bnjohanson (Aug 20, 2014)

mpc755 said:


> No, if you reverse the spin of one it does not reverse the spin of the other. They are not physically or superluminally connected. Due to conservation of momentum they are created with opposite polarizations. They are propagating as exact opposites. The mathematics of quantum mechanics applies to the pair as they are propagating with opposite angular momentums.




well now all of a sudden, I have learned quite a bit here just via this page...thanks again.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 20, 2014)

bnjohanson said:


> well now all of a sudden, I have learned quite a bit here just via this page...thanks again.



This is my understanding of entanglement and downconverted photon pairs. It is not the mainstream physics understanding.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 25, 2014)

What you see in the following image is the state of displacement of the aether.

What you see in the following image is deformed spacetime.







The caption in the image is incorrect.


----------



## Steevo (Aug 27, 2014)

I'm sure you know more than NASA.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_drag_hypothesis

And so you understand completely, when the double slit experiment is performed, with sensors on, but no recording of the event takes place interference patters still emerge, wholly refuting your weak detection.

http://phys.org/news/2014-08-duality-principle-safe-apparent-violation.html#inlRlv


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 27, 2014)

Steevo said:


> I'm sure you know more than NASA.
> 
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_drag_hypothesis



No one said anything about aether drag.

In the following video what is referred to as frame dragging is the state of displacement of the aether.










What is referred to as honey in the following article is the aether. What is referred to as the swirl in the honey is the state of displacement of the aether.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/gpb/gpb_results.html

_""Imagine the Earth as if it were immersed in honey. As the planet rotates, the honey around it would swirl, and it's the same with space and time," said Francis Everitt, GP-B principal investigator at Stanford University."_



> And so you understand completely, when the double slit experiment is performed, with sensors on, but no recording of the event takes place interference patters still emerge, wholly refuting your weak detection.
> 
> http://phys.org/news/2014-08-duality-principle-safe-apparent-violation.html#inlRlv



_'1st place: Shifting the morals of quantum measurement'
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article...rld-reveals-its-top-10-breakthroughs-for-2011

"Using an emerging technique called "weak measurement", the team is the first to track the average paths of single photons passing through a Young's double-slit experiment – something that Steinberg says physicists had been "brainwashed" into thinking is impossible."

'Quantum mechanics rule 'bent' in classic experiment'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13626587

'For his part, Professor Steinberg believes that the result reduces a limitation not on quantum physics but on physicists themselves. "I feel like we're starting to pull back a veil on what nature really is," he said. "The trouble with quantum mechanics is that while we've learned to calculate the outcomes of all sorts of experiments, we've lost much of our ability to describe what is really happening in any natural language. I think that this has really hampered our ability to make progress, to come up with new ideas and see intuitively how new systems ought to behave."'

'New 'Double Slit' Experiment Skirts Uncertainty Principle'
http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...-slit-experiment-skirts-uncertainty-principle

"Intriguingly, the trajectories closely match those predicted by an unconventional interpretation of quantum mechanics known as pilot-wave theory, in which each particle has a well-defined trajectory that takes it through one slit while the associated wave passes through both slits."

A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit. It is the associated wave which passes through both. As the wave exits the slits it creates wave interference. As the particle exits a single slit the direction it travels is altered by the wave interference. This is the wave guiding the particle. Strongly detecting the particle causes a loss of cohesion between the particle and its associated wave, the particle continues on the trajectory it was traveling and it does not form an interference pattern.

What waves in a double slit experiment is the aether.

_


----------



## Steevo (Aug 27, 2014)

If you look at the date, 2011, and now peer review of their experiments, result in, they used biased data. Congratulations, many scientists bias data to fit their hypothesis, they have their few moments of glory and then when reviewed by intellectually equal peers it all falls apart.


Logic dictates that if a particle, or particles interact with "aether" such as you have hypothesized, the aether will gain momentum, the same as a wave will, so the exchange of energy must be able to be calculated, and would cause a slowing of all light after it leaves its origin, but we know this not to be the case. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagnac_effect

I use gyroscopes with accelerometers to perform inertial guidance, and if aether altered the state of the photons traveling in the ring instead of frame reference we wouldn't be able to use such a simple device to perform such accurate calculations.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 27, 2014)

Steevo said:


> If you look at the date, 2011, and now peer review of their experiments, result in, they used biased data. Congratulations, many scientists bias data to fit their hypothesis, they have their few moments of glory and then when reviewed by intellectually equal peers it all falls apart.



Point to an article which says they used biased data. And the article you referred to has nothing to do with the Steinberg experiments.


----------



## Steevo (Aug 28, 2014)

mpc755 said:


> Point to an article which says they used biased data. And the article you referred to has nothing to do with the Steinberg experiments.


"In their 2012 version of the famous Young two-split experiment, Ralf Menzel and his colleagues at the University of Potsdam simultaneously determined a photon's path and observed high contrast interference fringes created by the interaction of waves from the two slits"

"*This phenomenon, called biased sampling*, occurs when certain measurements of a system *are selected* with a higher probability than others, and _*that subset of measurements is mistakenly taken to be representative of the entire system*_. In this case, the high visibility photon subsystem was more likely to be sampled. When Boyd's team "fairly" sampled each variable—giving each subsystem an equal opportunity to be detected and sampled—the problem went away and the results were consistent with the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics.

So, same experiment, same result, difference is the biased selection, or conditioned data. 


You are seriously inept if you can't read and understand these basic words. Plus, color. If photons were merely particles, we wouldn't have color. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/ems1.html#c1 unless....we have billions of different photon particles for each color of light, and billions of them all travel together so close, like a bromance of particles, and then when they hit a prism they all split up into their happy gay colored groups and continue to all be guided by non-interfering guide waves that (have no mass and no interaction of energy except the part where it appears and travels at the speed of light and influences the photon thus violating the conservation of momentum) allow them to segregate, since that is what all photons want, color segregation, it has been deemed so by the alpha Photon, Phitler. Its black.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 28, 2014)

Steevo said:


> "In their 2012 version of the famous Young two-split experiment, Ralf Menzel and his colleagues at the University of Potsdam simultaneously determined a photon's path and observed high contrast interference fringes created by the interaction of waves from the two slits"
> 
> "*This phenomenon, called biased sampling*, occurs when certain measurements of a system *are selected* with a higher probability than others, and _*that subset of measurements is mistakenly taken to be representative of the entire system*_. In this case, the high visibility photon subsystem was more likely to be sampled. When Boyd's team "fairly" sampled each variable—giving each subsystem an equal opportunity to be detected and sampled—the problem went away and the results were consistent with the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics.
> 
> ...



Steinberg and his group is in Canada.


----------



## Steevo (Aug 28, 2014)

So the key is maple syrup and being jewish. 


No wonder different results were found by those damn Germans!!! Jew haters!!!!! Quick make a Hitler reference before someone critically critiques his work and finds flaws.......


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 28, 2014)

Steevo said:


> So the key is maple syrup and being jewish.
> 
> 
> No wonder different results were found by those damn Germans!!! Jew haters!!!!! Quick make a Hitler reference before someone critically critiques his work and finds flaws.......



When you have evidence which refutes the Steinberg experiments, which are the ones I am referring to, then post it.


----------



## Steevo (Aug 28, 2014)

mpc755 said:


> When you have evidence which refutes the Steinberg experiments, which are the ones I am referring to, then post it.




http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...nbergs-uncertainty-principle-is-proven-false/

"Don't get too excited: the uncertainty principle still stands, says Steinberg: “In the end, there's no way you can know [both quantum states] accurately at the same time.” But the experiment shows that the act of measurement isn't always what causes the uncertainty. “If there's already a lot of uncertainty in the system, then there doesn't need to be any noise from the measurement at all,” he says." 2012

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?s=9ecdb02c4e40ce048e3550ac189596e3&t=280132

Plus all the information posted here. Cause you know, I read it and you just keep posting the same shit over and over, without actually showing a understanding of how and what is happening to the photon. Which has to interact with the aether, but can;t due to it being a violation of known laws, and the aether either being a particle soup and if it interacts it has to move, but if it isn't moving it can;t be interacting. 

But you know, I will watch as people probably smarter, much smarter than I continue to learn new things and you are stuck on this.


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 28, 2014)

Steevo said:


> http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...nbergs-uncertainty-principle-is-proven-false/
> 
> "Don't get too excited: the uncertainty principle still stands, says Steinberg: “In the end, there's no way you can know [both quantum states] accurately at the same time.” But the experiment shows that the act of measurement isn't always what causes the uncertainty. “If there's already a lot of uncertainty in the system, then there doesn't need to be any noise from the measurement at all,” he says." 2012



Which doesn't refute weak measurement.



> http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?s=9ecdb02c4e40ce048e3550ac189596e3&t=280132
> 
> Plus all the information posted here. Cause you know, I read it and you just keep posting the same shit over and over, without actually showing a understanding of how and what is happening to the photon. Which has to interact with the aether, but can;t due to it being a violation of known laws, and the aether either being a particle soup and if it interacts it has to move, but if it isn't moving it can;t be interacting.
> 
> But you know, I will watch as people probably smarter, much smarter than I continue to learn new things and you are stuck on this.



In the following article the aether has mass and is what waves in a double slit experiment.

'From the Newton's laws to motions of the fluid and superfluid vacuum: vortex tubes, rings, and others'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1403.3900


----------



## D007 (Aug 28, 2014)

I tried to understand this but all I did was end up doing one of these. .

I get the gist though I think. DM is a wave, not a particle?
I've always thought about all things that exist, in more of a fluid world, rather than a particle world.
Like how a lot of people think air is a gas, when it is technically a liquid.

Kind of like that?
I tried..lol

Neat topic anyway. 



Steevo said:


> And when it is observed it does what to the aether waves? Creating a theory means looking for reasons its wrong, not, how can we make the data fit our theory.



Lol tell that to string theory. XD


----------



## mpc755 (Aug 28, 2014)

D007 said:


> I tried to understand this but all I did was end up doing one of these. .
> 
> I get the gist though I think. DM is a wave, not a particle?
> I've always thought about all things that exist, in more of a fluid world, rather than a particle world.
> ...



An analogy would be a boat and its bow wave. In a boat double slit experiment the boat travels through a single slit and the bow wave passes through both. If the bow wave were far enough in front of the boat it would exit both slits prior to the boat exiting a single slit. As the bow wave exited both slits it could alter the course the boat travels. This would be the bow wave guiding the boat. If you placed a bunch of pilings at the exits to the slits in order to detect the boat the boat would get knocked around by the pilings, lose its cohesion with its bow wave, and continue on the trajectory it was traveling.

Aether has mass. Aether physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether is physically displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it. In a double slit experiment the particle travels a well defined path through a single slit and the associated wave in the aether passes through both. As the wave exits the slits it creates wave interference. As the particle exits a single slit the direction it travels is altered by the wave interference. This is the wave guiding the particle. The particle will create an interference pattern when its associated wave is allowed to guide it. Strongly detecting the particle exiting a single slit destroys the cohesion between the particle and its associated wave, the particle continues on the trajectory it was traveling and it does not form an interference pattern.

In the following article aether has mass and is what waves in a double slit experiment.

'From the Newton's laws to motions of the fluid and superfluid vacuum: vortex tubes, rings, and others'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1403.3900

Watch the following video starting at 2:40 to see a double slit experiment. It's not a great example of a double slit experiment as it is not the associated wave exiting both slits which guides the particle. However, it is a good example of a double slit experiment where the particle always travels through a single slit and the particle has an associated physical wave.


----------



## mpc755 (Sep 23, 2014)

'Pilot-Wave Hydrodynamics
John W.M. Bush'
http://math.mit.edu/~bush/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Bush-ARFM-2015.pdf

_"Finally, as concerns my alignment vis-a-vis quantum interpretations, I remain steadfastly agnostic; however, if forced to choose, I would be inclined to back, by virtue of its inclusivity, the logical extension of the Many-Worlds interpretation (Everett 1957), the Many-Many-Worlds interpretation, according to which each quantum interpretation is realized in some edition of the multimultiverse, and there is even one world in which there is only one world, a world in which quantum statistics are underlaid by *chaotic pilot-wave dynamics*, there is no philosophical schism between large and small, and beables be."_

'NON-LINEAR WAVE MECHANICS
A CAUSAL INTERPRETATION
by
LOUIS DE BROGLIE'

_"* Since 1954, when this passage was written, I have come to support wholeheartedly an hypothesis proposed by Bohm and Vigier. According to this hypothesis, the random perturbations to which the particle would be constantly subjected, and which would have the probability of presence in terms of [wave-funciton wave], *arise from the interaction of the particle with a “subquantic medium” which escapes our observation and is entirely chaotic, and which is everywhere present in what we call “empty space"*."_


----------



## mpc755 (Sep 30, 2014)

'Interpretation of quantum mechanics by the double solution theory - Louis de BROGLIE'
http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-classiques/aflb124p001.pdf

_“When in 1923-1924 I had my first ideas about Wave Mechanics I was looking for a truly concrete physical image, valid for all particles, of the wave and particle coexistence discovered by Albert Einstein in his "Theory of light quanta". I had no doubt whatsoever about the physical reality of waves and particles.”

“any particle, even isolated, has to be imagined as in continuous “energetic contact” with a hidden medium”_

The hidden medium of de Broglie wave mechanics is the aether. The “energetic contact” is the state of displacement of the aether.

_"For me, the particle, precisely located in space at every instant, forms on the v wave a small region of high energy concentration, which may be likened in a first approximation, to a moving singularity."_

A particle may be likened in a first approximation to a moving singularity which has an associated aether displacement wave.

_"the particle is defined as a very small region of the wave"

"If a hidden sub-quantum medium is assumed, knowledge of its nature would seem desirable. It certainly is of quite complex character. It could not serve as a universal reference medium, as this would be contrary to relativity theory."_

de Broglie is referring to a relativistic aether.

Aether has mass. Aether physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether is physically displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.

The Milky Way's halo is not a clump of dark matter traveling along with the Milky Way. The Milky Way is moving through and displacing the aether. The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether.

The Milky Way's halo is the deformation of spacetime.

What is referred to as the deformation of spacetime is the state of displacement of the aether.

The state of displacement of the aether is gravity.

A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and the associated wave in the aether passes through both.

In a double slit experiment it is the aether that waves.


----------



## Drone (Oct 13, 2014)




----------



## mpc755 (Oct 13, 2014)

Drone said:


>



I'm not watching a 43 minute video simply because you posted it. Is there a couple of minutes I should watch?


----------



## mikeatine (Aug 11, 2016)

This is an older post but still shows up as a top result on Google and, oddly many of mpc755's quotes are repeated verbatim on other discussion sites which still currently generate high traffic so I feel I should throw in my 2 cents.
Basically, mpc755 has been thoroughly disproven by Steevo... For those entering this thread, please consider the series of arguments from Steevo, especially his final one, which contain actual references to scientific articles as opposed to MPC755's constant copying and reposting of statements already made prior.
Again, it's odd that mpc755's supposed direct quotes show on many other sites under different usernames. He/She seemed to be unusually committed marketing this idea.


----------



## Drone (Aug 11, 2016)

@mikeatine I wonder why did you decide to bump this? 

If it's Google's fault that it shows @mpc755's bullshit instead of something useful there's nothing we can do about it. @mpc55 might be wrong or maybe she/he's just an asshole, why should we care if they're committed to this idea anyway?


----------



## dorsetknob (Aug 11, 2016)

mikeatine said:


> oddly many of mpc755's quotes are repeated verbatim on other discussion sites which still currently generate high traffic


If you tread in bullshit then walk around your house then of course your walk that bullshit all over your house


----------



## mikeatine (Aug 11, 2016)

There are certainly things you could do about keeping his thread from showing results, however, that would be contrary to the very existence of this thread as it still remains on the site's servers for a reason.
I wouldn't want to encourage removal or remission of any intelligent open scientific discussion.
I bumped this thread because, Ultimately it's still being statistically used as a top source of knowledge amongst users of the world's most popular search engine and is therefore relevant.


----------



## dorsetknob (Aug 11, 2016)

mikeatine said:


> it's still being statistically used as a top source of knowledge amongst users of the world's most popular search engine


----------



## dorsetknob (Aug 11, 2016)

You can perform as many experiments as you like
"" TO DETECT DARK MATTER ! ""

BUT YOU CANNOT CONDUCT EXPERIMENTS WITH DARK MATTER UNTIL IT IS DETECTED AND PROVEN TO EXIST

that is a Scientific principal


----------

