Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

C is infinity thus electrons can be in two places at once!

  1. Feb 21, 2012 #1
    My thought experiment is this:

    The slit experiment showing photons are
    particles and waves leaves out a constant that is wrong.

    c in a vaccum is 187kph because vaccum is a medium.

    c is infinite in true nothing. Our sample time of an electron
    Thus gives probabilities not definates.

    The slit produces a pattern like water waves because the photon
    Is interacting with its medium.

    How am I incorrect in this basic assumption? I am aware it
    Destroys any equation so something is missing. why is c so
    Limited if it is not in a medium like water we call a vaccum?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Feb 21, 2012 #2

    DaveC426913

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    You might want to check up on your facts. I'm pretty sure that light is faster than the average race car.

    The rest of what you've written makes as little sense. Vacuum is not a medium.
     
  4. Feb 21, 2012 #3
    Apologies as the unit of speed of light.

    That is the question, why is a vaccum not a medium
    Light travels through it creating interference

    Light in vaccum is limited just as in glass or any other medium.
    We fail at the basic assumption a vaccum is empty.
    The calculations work out with c based on glass the same since
    We are deriving from experiment the velocity of photons.

    I understand the wave as probiblity where the photon is
    but im having g trouble defigning a vaccum as we assume it.
     
  5. Feb 21, 2012 #4

    strangerep

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    dadnoonan,

    This is exactly the "aether" debate that was going on over 100 years ago. People couldn't understand how light could propagate in "nothing".

    Special relativity showed that the "vacuum is a medium" concept (i.e., the "aether" concept) is unnecessary. (Also indicated by the Michelson-Morley experiment, and others.)

    Your question probably belongs over in the relativity forum. They can probably suggest a suitable textbook.
     
  6. Feb 21, 2012 #5
    Thank you very much! I've looked into this only a bit. I know the maths play out as not necessary
    Even in the vastness of space having every electron know information
    about the others is what I was trying to reconcile. Ignoring the math
    (Not overlooking simply for simplicity sake of the question)
    Where is physics on how this works across spacetime?

    Heading the reccomended direction.

    Thanks for the insight!
     
  7. Feb 21, 2012 #6
    couldnt the stuff feynman dicovered in vacuum effect c?
     
  8. Feb 21, 2012 #7

    strangerep

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Not sure what you're talking about. If you're referring to virtual particles,well they're not real. Rather they're just a mathematical artifact of trying to treat the vacuum of the free theory as being the same as the vacuum of the interacting theory. Only the latter is physical.

    Afaik, there's still no experimental evidence against the postulate of special relativity that the speed of light is the same for all inertial observers.
     
  9. Feb 21, 2012 #8

    strangerep

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

  10. Feb 21, 2012 #9
    The reason for more experimentation.
    Empty vaccum as in hawking radiation. Kinda what the LHC
    Is doing, by virtual particles. That's the not empty part im at.
    Like we are the the pudding model in our understanding.
    Aren't we at levels now that should prove which is correct in our
    Universe? Dark matter and more the dark energy is making a vaccum seem less empty
    Special realitivity doesn't say its empty, simply not necessary.

    I apologize greatly for the disjointedness of my free association thinking.

    Hydrogen for example, positrons here then gone. Im going over 1928 reading again
    And of I am correct I will be proven wrong which proves my thought is rightly
    Flawed and my universe does it exist sadly.
     
  11. Feb 22, 2012 #10
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle

    in a holographic universe every person, every dust mote, every particle contains all the information of the whole universe within itself
     
  12. Feb 22, 2012 #11

    DaveC426913

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    No it does not.

    Did you read the article you linked to?
     
  13. Feb 22, 2012 #12
  14. Feb 22, 2012 #13

    DaveC426913

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    While that may be true, that is not what the Holographic Principle is about.

    In a nutshell, the Holographic Principle states that, for a given volume of space, all the information contained within that volume can be encoded on the surface of that volume. A direct derivation of this is that the upper limit of the amount of information that the volume of space can contain is limited to how much can be encoded on its surface.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: C is infinity thus electrons can be in two places at once!
  1. Two places at once (Replies: 11)

  2. 2 places at once (Replies: 1)

Loading...