Recent content by lostinmygarden

Hi. It is important to note, I am suggesting something different to what you understand to be correct. This is the point of the simulation. What if......? Aren't photons, that are created with entangled polarizations, correlated? So they either have the same or opposite polarization? My...

I updated the python code to extract data necessary to calculate E, these results are identical to the current method. So that was good to see. I think it was too obscure, so can't be broken out to make more sense. As for updating the current processes, the angle recalculation is messy, but...

Feel free to make amendments, I really appreciate it. I haven't done programming in years, so bit slow. If you enable the output of test data, you will see how it handles the angles and how it checks if detected or not. I'm probably not going to be able to do much this evening, but will try and...

More background on this approach: https://demonstrations.wolfram.com/AModelForPhotonPolarizationAndDetection/ [Mentors' note: this post has been edited to remove some gratuitous snark]

I have added a flag to enable and disable test output. The logic passes sanity checks. This isPython code to simulate same as excel document, with some adjustments. S value can be achieved around 50% of the time, simply re-run simulation. In this code, you can amend NoOfPhotons to create a set...

I have added a flag to enable and disable test output. The logic passes sanity checks. This isPython code to simulate same as excel document, with some adjustments. S value can be achieved around 50% of the time, simply re-run simulation. In this code, you can amend NoOfPhotons to create a...

I have added a flag to enable and disable test output. The logic passes sanity checks. There is a flag to enable and disable test output. The logic passes sanity checks. I'll look into adapting this to radians too. Pass my bedtime here now. Thank you for your feedback ☺️

The code randomly generates angles between 0 and 359, then adds a random number between 0 and 1. This is to ensure values are between 0 and 360, also ensures that angles can vary, very slightly. It does this for each photon generated. I ran with 10800 photons in python and on first run got S =...

Thanks. Yes, I didn't go too large in excel as it doesn't like it much. It gives the general idea, but it is limited. I will try my python equivalent. I wasn't intending on using python, but I have made it scalable. I'll ensure it just generates a random distribution too.

Yes, I think it is a good time for you to do so.

And I mean the exact angle, not a yes/no answer

Please show me an experiment which tells you the exact polarization of a photon, prior to it being modified by a polarizer.

I will include the python code I have updated, if you would like to run it yourself. import numpy as np import pandas as pd # Step 1: Create a list of 360 values with random angles between 0 and 89 # reducing from 359 to 89 for easier testing of detection # reducing photons for easier readout...

Again, you have not read my document. Experiments do not know polarization of photons. My test says these are determined at creation and generates results based on the criteria I have written. It may go against what you are saying, this is the point, it is another view. Doing what I suggest will...

A photon that is mostly vertically aligned to a polarizer, will/should be detected as vertically polarized. You may have quoted, but you are wrong in your conclusions. I clearly state measurement criteria in my document (which you have not looked at). A photon that has polarization which is...