|
|
Due to spam and off-topic content, these forums are being phased out and replaced with new great books forums. Please join us!
Posted by ZErO CooL on July 23, 19100 at 23:16:52:
In Reply to: Lets clarify this. posted by Bruce on July 23, 19100 at 13:25:07:
As far as I can see Onlooker explanation is correct.
However the original point made in this forum was not about did we need TDM to explain the this experiment?
It was, does TDM predict what occurs within this experiment?
In one simple answer yes it does!
However there is an interesting point about Dr Wang's experiment. I.E As you are aware he is exploiting the QM terms of the randomness to the location of the photon and of the case of it not being rest m.
Is it not that case that Dr Nimtz' experiments into Quantum Electron Tunnelling directly challenge this randomness? I.E if as QM states this is a random process then how is it possible to transfer data in sequence?
Although one is described directly as tunnelling and the other as a wave effect, they are both exploiting the randomness of the QM photon. However the results of Dr Nimtz's experiments directly challenge the randomness of the photon in QM.
Thus cancelling the representations and or explanations of both experiments in QM terms.
It is interesting however when you apply the infinitely sliding finite scale frame/range of observation that is TDM. You no longer find these problems occurring.
Within TDM you can explain the reactions within both experiments, in both particle and wave terms. Without having to rely upon quirks of the theory or that can be described as double talk.
So if we ignore the Results of the QET experiments then yes we do not need what you described as "MUMBO JUMBO". However we cannot ignore the results of the QET experiments as they have been repeated many times with the same results.
Thus as a result of Dr Nimtz's experiments.Dr Wang finds himself in exactly the same position as that of Dr Nimtz. I.E having an experiment which does not conform to conventional understanding. As currently the QET experiments have knocked that understandinig for six.
So do we need this "MUMBO JUMBO" as you described it to explain these experiments. Well yes we do!