Ned Latham
2015-09-03 08:39:01 UTC
Copyright © 2014 Ned Latham
See the original at
http://www.users.on.net/~nedlatham/Science/ModellingLight/exprts.html
Until now, all versions of the single- and double-slit experiments have
placed the barrier so that the impingement of the incident light is
normal to it. It is proposed that versions of both be conducted using
non-zero angles of incidence as follows:
¤ Determine an axis of rotation for the barrier in the same plane
as the barrier and running parallel to the slit(s).
¤ For the single-slit experiment, locate it in the centre of the
slit; for the double-slit experiment, locate it in the centre
of the space between the slits.
The wave model predicts that the light will emerge from the slits as
wave fronts parallel to the barrier; the particle model predicts that
it will remain on a straight-line trajectory.
--------
Until now, all versions of the single- and double-slit experiments have
been based on slits in a very thin barrier. It is proposed that
very-thick-barrier versions of the single-slit experiment be conducted.
The wave model predicts that the same amount of light will emerge from
the slit as entered it; the particle model predicts that because of
the gravitational attraction between the photons and the walls of the
slit the amount of light emerging from the slit will be inversely
proportional to the thickness of the barrier and directly proportional
to the width of the slit.
--------
The particle model predicts that, given the same emission type,
red-shifted light travels slower than non-shifted light which in
turn travels slower than blue-shifted light[1], while the wave model
predicts that the speed of light is constant. It is proposed,
therefore, that Foucault's or Michelson's method of measuring
the speed of light be employed, using light from, say, a quasar
for red-shifted light, the sun for non-shifted light, and Andromeda
for blue-shifted light.
And if the colour-shift sources aren't bright enough for Earth-based
measurement, build the apparatus in space.
--------
The particle model presented here proposes gravity as the cause of
changes in the direction of light in diffraction, in diffusion, and
in refractive and gravitational lenses. It is noted that in all of
those phenomena the amount of change in direction is directly
proportional[2] to the energy of the light. That implies an effect
that looks like an energy-dependent variance in the force of
gravity; that is to say, the greater an object's energy, the
greater the effect gravity has on it.
It is noteworthy that the precessions of planetary perihelia seem
to show the same proportionality and therefore the same implication.
Whether that is actually so, however, is not clear; the assumptions
that allow calculations based on Einstein's mathematics to agree
with observations must be clarified. So too must the assumptions
behind the observations.
--------
1 More precisely, the predicted speed of the light from each of
the sources is inversely proportional to the wavelength of the
light from a chosen spectral point (say, the lowest-frequency
Frauenhofer line of Iron) in the spectrum of light from each
of the sources; ie,
vS / vH = wH / wS,
where v is speed, w is wavelength, S is light from one source
and H is light from another source.
2 The relationship is direct, as opposed to the intuitive inverse,
and also non-linear. Much work has been done analysing the
wavelength dependency of chromatic aberration for practical
purposes, but I cannot find any reference to work aimed at
determining the exact relationship so the best that can be
said in traditional terms is that the amount of aberration
is inversely and non-linearly dependent on wavelength.
--------
Ned
See the original at
http://www.users.on.net/~nedlatham/Science/ModellingLight/exprts.html
Until now, all versions of the single- and double-slit experiments have
placed the barrier so that the impingement of the incident light is
normal to it. It is proposed that versions of both be conducted using
non-zero angles of incidence as follows:
¤ Determine an axis of rotation for the barrier in the same plane
as the barrier and running parallel to the slit(s).
¤ For the single-slit experiment, locate it in the centre of the
slit; for the double-slit experiment, locate it in the centre
of the space between the slits.
The wave model predicts that the light will emerge from the slits as
wave fronts parallel to the barrier; the particle model predicts that
it will remain on a straight-line trajectory.
--------
Until now, all versions of the single- and double-slit experiments have
been based on slits in a very thin barrier. It is proposed that
very-thick-barrier versions of the single-slit experiment be conducted.
The wave model predicts that the same amount of light will emerge from
the slit as entered it; the particle model predicts that because of
the gravitational attraction between the photons and the walls of the
slit the amount of light emerging from the slit will be inversely
proportional to the thickness of the barrier and directly proportional
to the width of the slit.
--------
The particle model predicts that, given the same emission type,
red-shifted light travels slower than non-shifted light which in
turn travels slower than blue-shifted light[1], while the wave model
predicts that the speed of light is constant. It is proposed,
therefore, that Foucault's or Michelson's method of measuring
the speed of light be employed, using light from, say, a quasar
for red-shifted light, the sun for non-shifted light, and Andromeda
for blue-shifted light.
And if the colour-shift sources aren't bright enough for Earth-based
measurement, build the apparatus in space.
--------
The particle model presented here proposes gravity as the cause of
changes in the direction of light in diffraction, in diffusion, and
in refractive and gravitational lenses. It is noted that in all of
those phenomena the amount of change in direction is directly
proportional[2] to the energy of the light. That implies an effect
that looks like an energy-dependent variance in the force of
gravity; that is to say, the greater an object's energy, the
greater the effect gravity has on it.
It is noteworthy that the precessions of planetary perihelia seem
to show the same proportionality and therefore the same implication.
Whether that is actually so, however, is not clear; the assumptions
that allow calculations based on Einstein's mathematics to agree
with observations must be clarified. So too must the assumptions
behind the observations.
--------
1 More precisely, the predicted speed of the light from each of
the sources is inversely proportional to the wavelength of the
light from a chosen spectral point (say, the lowest-frequency
Frauenhofer line of Iron) in the spectrum of light from each
of the sources; ie,
vS / vH = wH / wS,
where v is speed, w is wavelength, S is light from one source
and H is light from another source.
2 The relationship is direct, as opposed to the intuitive inverse,
and also non-linear. Much work has been done analysing the
wavelength dependency of chromatic aberration for practical
purposes, but I cannot find any reference to work aimed at
determining the exact relationship so the best that can be
said in traditional terms is that the amount of aberration
is inversely and non-linearly dependent on wavelength.
--------
Ned