I should actually add these days we can go smaller and more precise than even a laser beam we can go down to a single photon which there are methods to tag a photon with Quantum entanglement.

The process is call pre-heralding and so you can track an individual photon of light and detect it's arrival.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130520154251.htm

The initial detection rate was 84% I understand that has been improved lately.

So definitely no inverse square law for a single photon situation science basically can do anything to test your theory they would just need it to be viable to want to spend the money to do it.

I think we are getting somewhere near the misunderstanding and I guess we should ask and make sure you accept


For a single photon the inverse square problem doesn't and can't exist because it is a single item .. correct? Maciej Marosz doesn't exhibit inverse square law because he is a single item .. that's the simplicity of the logic.

Normally I would take it a person realizes and accepts that but I need to check with you that you understand what a photon is.

Ultimately the question we are after is Maciej Marosz or Einstein correctly predicting the behavior of a single photon of light and as that doesn't involve the inverse square law so we need to get it out of our experiments and discussion in some agreed way.


So are we clear I don't understand how you think the inverse square law gets involved, unless it has something to do with your home experiment and if that is the case lets ignore your home experiment for now.

My position is straight forward Maciej Marosz as a person doesn't exhibit square law behavior a photon of light also doesn't exhibit square law behavior because it is ONE item.

What I am starting to think is you think a photon of light spreads out in 3D like a radio wave it doesn't it is a particle called a gauge boson under electromagnetic theory.

Is that why we don't see the same answers .. I need you to tell me you understand what a photon is?

Does everything above make sense to you?


See I had not thought about this before because we sort of don't think like layman smile If you got confused and thought a photon did emit in every direction it's energy would get less and less by the square law laugh

Why no one would think about it like that is the photon is the emission ... a photon doesn't emit anything. It would be like telling me Maciej Marosz is emitting Maciej Marosz's. You see the directionality of a photon in the movies with the sniper red dot on the person to be shot. You can't see the beam in travel because the photons are directional you only see them when they hit a target and bounce off in all directions and hence you see the dot on the target.

Is that what has got you confused you got photons all mixed up?


Edited by Orac (11/01/13 07:21 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.