Originally Posted By: finiter
No there is no proof for QM; only observational evidences, which in fact are wrongly explained.


ROFL so you don't doubt the observation but the explaination is wrong even though you can't provide any viable alternative.

Here is what you are saying

"Yes I can see the dinosaur bones but I am sure there is a perfectly good reason they ressemble animal bones but as I know there are no such animals the explaination is wrong"

Come on do you really expect us to take you seriously with that stupidity of an argument.

Provide a valid answer and I might even remotely take you seriously otherwise the only person you are deluding is yourself.


Originally Posted By: Orac
Are you saying that interference is not possible if electrons are sent one by one? Whether it is a wave or particle, interference patterns are obtained even if the electrons are sent one by one. Each electron hits a particular point of the sensitive screen, and finally after a statistically significant number of electrons had hit the plate, the plate will show an interference pattern.


In the old days we couldn't seperate single electrons .. we can now because we can go into the terahertz range of operations.

I can send one electron every one minute if I want or maybe just one single electron ever.

If I take a photo of that one electron event I will see the interference pattern.


Originally Posted By: finiter

This is what I have read. I do not know whether it is a theoretical explanation, or a computer simulation or an actual experiment.


What you have read is the old attempt to appease those who didn't like the wave behaviour and preserve there precious little particles because they wanted these little particle things to make there wonderful stupidity they called the atom model which looked like a little mini solar system.

Of coarse that model stupidity is now dead and we can prove that story is rubbish.


Originally Posted By: finiter

What I have explained is that even if it is a solid particle, due to the difference in the magnetic field, half of the electrons are bent towards the edge of the slit and half away from the edge, and thus a pattern similar to the interference pattern can be formed.


And as I have explained what you have read is 1970's rubbish that few scientist would even remotely consider viable.


You are dealing with one of thousands of observations I can give you for wave behaviour but that is not your challenge so you don't have to proove it wrong you keep getting sidetracked.


YOUR TASK WAS TO SHOW ME OBSERVAION THAT SUPPORTS OR PROOVES THERE ARE SOLID PARTICLES.


See here is the interesting thing you say that your world is reality etc yet your whole theory is based on a lie.

Some idiot when you were going to school told you there were these things called particles, they had no valid observation to tell you that but they did.


You believed that implicitly and infact you have built illussions around it in your head this is "your reality".


As I said unfortunately I can't help you there is no scientific observation of your fantasy solid particles and I know alot of science observations.


Do you see why I laugh at you trying to dismiss QM at least I have observations for believing my fantasy yours is built on the lie told to you at school and based on chemistry that was wrong.

Last edited by Orac; 11/02/11 06:48 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.