How does the Innovation of Old Ideas Occur?

[wiredandwound]

I have mentioned various things from mundane personal feelings, science, and philosophical opinions. I appreciate that we all have various levels of experience and practice that are unique to us. I see all to often that someone's point of view is "written-off", without question - in which I am guilty of also.

Are the person's views really that off-the-mark?
Is there a chance that maybe they understand something that you may not have experience with?

Perhaps.

This is why I wanted to start a new thread that is geared to encourage bringing these types of arguments to a more stable platform, for all parties involved. (replies about "that's just how the internet is..." is highly discouraged).

• A targeted approach to question the idea
  • question one concept of the idea at a time
• blanketed refutations are not productive
  • You or the other person may only be confused on certain points, but not the entire idea as a whole
• It can be hard to hear some points of view
  • Grow a pair, and speak with sincerity, if you feel that you must reply to whatever offends

I'd like to start this discussion with a topic that many people often find very controversial.

My opinion is that Quantum Mechanics is utter bullshit. I didn't just come to this conclusion one day when I got into a mood and decided to start hating on it. It happened through the course of almost my entire life. I did not come to my conclusions because I heard them somewhere; although I do tend to listen to people whom had similar conclusions.

All my life I've been observing nature. I don't mean just being in it as a matter of fact, but I mean actually noticing things about it. I don't see the things described in QM, nor do I believe that when QM discovers things, that they are of any benefit to mankind. For what purpose does the discovery of something NOT found in nature benefit us - we who exist in nature?

Example: The Double Slit Experiment. QM often uses this to describe the importance of Probability.

• Forgive the hyperbole, but this does not affect the cost of tea in China
  • So why is it so important?
  • Where is this found in nature?

I can say where it ISN'T found, and that is in Photography, which has an inherent relation to the the topic.

• The slits in the DSE are actually Apertures.
  • These are one of the 3 main parts of exposure in photography
• The film or sensors of the DSE are used to determine Probability
  • Cameras use film or sensors to detect light intensity

Here's the poop... In engineering and photography, when the intensity of the light is reduced by the aperture, below a certain threshold, there is something called "NOISE". this has nothing to do with probability of the light photons. What it does have to do with, is that the sensor is in a Metastable State, where the bits are free to be either on or off, due to the Intensity of the light being below a certain threshold. This is the same with Film, where the random sizes of grains of the film have different sensitivities, especially in low light conconditions.

What say you, naysayers?

 

[Krypton]

@wiredandwound If we're going with the Metastable state explanation, why would the double slit experiment always yield the specific interference pattern of bars rather than something more random?

EDIT: Never mind, figured it out.

 

[wiredandwound]

Waves and their natures:
Here's an interesting one for sure, because it seems that QM and Classical physics both have this wrong IMO.
Let's take a look at what happens in nature:

Why do the waves on the ocean, or any fluid body, only occur on the surface?
This is a direct observation that is easy to witness in nature. These waves are transverse, meaning that they are (y) axis forces, occurring orthogonally in respect to the medium's normal boundary, (in liquids the normal is identified as the perpendicular vector from the surface of the medium, to the center of gravitational origin).

Observers may ask, "why then do the waves propagate on the (x) axis"?
Waves and Propagation (induction) are two completely different things. I use the word Induction because it is a better term than propagation because it is not misleading the observer. Transverse Waves, (effect property) only have a (y) axis force; therefore, they are not moving outwards, only up and down. Induction, (causal property) is a force on the (x) axis that is allowing an outward expansion. As the surface of the water is forced upwards or downwards, the surface area is increased beyond equilibrium of the volume. When this happens, forces are induced in the (x) axis.
It also needs to be understood that transverse waves do not propagate from their origin, but attenuate at a logarithmic rate in the same locus that it was formed, (this is called the flywheel effect).

"So then why does this only occur on the surface"?
Longitudinal waves are (x) axis forces, occurring parallel to the medium's normal boundary. Longitudinal waves are the typical wave that is induced throughout an Homogeneous medium. Homogeneous density throughout a medium is the most important characteristic to induce the propagation of energy efficiently. In electrical theory, density is the same as Impedance. When the impedance changes, losses occur due to the effect of the longitudinal (x) axis wave, being forced into the (y) axis. This is called transient behaviour.

Now we can see that when the energy from the air (as wind), propagates longitudinally through the atmosphere, when it come into contact with the higher density medium of water, the vector (phase angle) of the wave is converted to a Transverse wave.

My question to all the physics world is, "Why do they consider radio waves, in free-space, Transverse, when the medium of free-space is an Homogeneous medium"?