View Single Post
nortonian
#19
Mar10-12, 12:36 AM
P: 59
This is an out of the blue comment, and I don't see any connection to the subject matter. Around here, an expert is an expert.
I agree.

There are 8 pages of historical developments and experimental discussions in the paper you cite but only two sentences are used to define what a “single photon” is. I don't question the accuracy of the experiments or that they are able to make good predictions. I question the assumptions that they begin with and the logic behind them. Can you cite something more basic?

I believe that the Marshall and Santos papers I cited do a better job of looking at fundamentals. Although they do not offer a more accurate theory they have the advantage that they reject non-locality. Will you comment on their argument that when the zero point field is used to describe the photon it is actually a classical model?