Recent content by Quarker

When conducting a double-slit experiment, is there any pattern that forms on the back of the screen containing the slits?

It sounds like there can be an interference pattern without any interference actually taking place, just a wave function that for some odd reason makes it appear as if there is.

So in the right conditions, quantum forces can create interference patterns with one another even though they exist at different times?

In a double-slit experiment, an EM wave is said to travel all paths to the screen, even though only one path will appear at measurement. Do any of those paths include the possibility of the EM wave traveling backwards in time? Or being detected in a place that would imply faster than light...

It’s been 50 years since any major new developments have occurred. I don’t think there’s any doubt that modern physics exists within a cubicle universe.

Could the central disc of an Airy disc be “brighter” than the surrounding ring? Or could the central disc itself have a higher intensity in the very center of the disc?

Assuming an Airy disc with one ring, does the dark ring around the central disc have the same area as the disc and bright ring? Do the bright and dark areas balance out exactly? Is that how energy is conserved?

An Airy Disc’s rings get brighter if the point source of light is increased. How is that extra energy transferred to the outer rings?

I’m not going to speculate about something that hasn’t been detected yet. If there is a negative energy associated with areas of destructive interference, people may not agree on where that negative energy comes from.

Because theory says that the energy created by destructive interference should be zero.

Is the array sensitive enough to detect any slight variations of energy that may imply the existence of dark energy? A steady state EM wave obeys the law of conservation of energy, but how has it been proven that destructive interference doesn’t create negative energy, which would still conserve...

How has this been proven experimentally, aside from the conservation of energy argument?

Would an artificial star and a sensor in a telescope serve the same purpose, or would the introduction of a lens in the light path create too many variables? It seems like it would be easier to measure the total energy of an Airy disc than a double-slit interference pattern.

Thanks!

It sounds like there’s no way to verify that the energy going into an interference pattern equals the energy coming out, at least experimentally.