Goodstein's explanation is not logically sound Chapt15.34 explaining Superconductivity from Maxwell Equations #1112 New Physics #1232 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed
Dec 25, 2012 7:05 PM
Aharonov-Bohm effect with a pilot-wave as explanation for the Goodstein polarization demonstration.
Now tonight I shall review that demonstration again of the "The Mechanical Universe" episode 50 "Particles and Waves." I have to review it, because Goodstein does a disservice to explaining what is truly going on. The part of the demonstration where he sticks a oblique polarizing filter in between a horizontal and vertical filter and where some photons get through. Goodstein explains it as "you guys thought you were up and down and now you guys changed to be oblique.." words to that effect. And where a good number of the students thought there would not be a light appearing.
The trouble with Goodstein's explanation is that it really, logically does not explain it at all.
So when we encounter an explanation that does not explain logically, we have to scrap the explanation and find out what really is working and causes the situation.
So we have to ask, what is the most simple explanation for why the oblique regains some light going through. And the best explanation is that the oblique causes the photons to shift, or break apart and to reform and so the photons that make it through the last filter are reformed photons due to the oblique filter.
Now there is a experiment called the Aharonov-Bohm experiment where a solenoid is placed between two slits of the double slit experiment and the solenoid reforms the photons and shifts the interference on the screen.
So if we look at the Goodstein demonstration as the two filters, the horizontal and vertical and those constitute the double slits, and the oblique filter as the solenoid, then we have a better explanation than Goodstein's "you guys thought you were up and down." A better explanation because the solenoid or oblique filter causes the photons magnetic monopoles to reform.
Now I am looking into the idea that the Double Transverse wave pictured as this:
pictured as a cross, or the diagonals of a square.
And the single-transverse wave that Goodstein was working under, pictured as this:
a L shaped transverse wave with the E and B fields.
I am thinking that Dirac who derived the strength of the magnetic monopole to be 137/2(e). That Dirac's derivation may in fact be the minimum transverse wave of a photon where it has at least 137/2 vertices. My double-transverse wave has only 4 vertices, and Goodstein's single transverse wave has only 2 vertices.
But imagine for a moment that all photons have at minimum 137/2 vertices. They would appear like a circle in 2D or like a cylinder in 3rd Dimension. They would appear like the spokes of a bicycle wheel in 2D.
Now, can I explain Goodstein's demonstration with utmost logic, and not the silly "you guys thought you were up and down but really.."?
Well, picture a cylinder of vertices going through the horizontal filter and only horizontal survives, but a transverse wave has to allow the vertical to survive, but if the two and only two filters are horizontal and vertical, those two eliminate all the photons. Now if we stick a oblique in between the horizontal and vertical, the horizontal surviving that hit the oblique, allow the oblique component to survive. So the oblique makes the experiment as if there were no horizontal at all. So the experiment has become a oblique and vertical filter only and some photons get through.
Google's New-Newsgroups censors AP posts, especially the mobile phones such as iphone deleted all of AP's post, and halted a proper archiving of AP, but Drexel's Math Forum does not censor and my posts in sequential archive form is seen here: