Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-01T17:18:51Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:18, 1 January 2017
Line 17:		Line 17:
	In his explanation of the Photo-Electric Effect Einstein defines his photons as ?energy quanta which are localised at ''points'' in space? and possessed of a frequency ''E = hv'' at the very same time. (''Rbv/N'' in his text.) Thus we are told that energy is quantized, because rather than a field spreading continuously over a region, ?light is ''discontinuously'' distributed in space?. [Einstein, 1965 (1905), p. 368] Planck's notion of quantization meant the discrete spectrum of eigen states (or eigen frequencies) of a single oscillator, sufficient in itself to make quantization manifest. But in order that a photon can make its own ?quantization' manifest it needs ''another photon''. Alone it is just a speck in space. In Planck's original it would not be enough, it would not even be relevant, to call cars in a car park ?quantized', mainly because they are ?discontinuously distributed in space'. My aunt and I are thus distributed. Are we quantized? To Einstein it seems we must be. Yet, albeit discontinuously distributed at points in space, photons have a ...frequency in this new setting! I cannot even begin to fathom how anything localized at a point can have a frequency, but what I do fathom is how Duality sprang forth from precisely this infected womb, now weirdly impregnated by an unlovely hybrid. To get back to QM as it was initially conceived, I reinterpret ''E = hv'', now ''Et = h'', and ''p = h/l'', now ''pl = h'', as alternative definitions of quantized ''action'', committed to neither waves nor particles. I conclude with what Duality ''really'' was in the mind of the man so wrongly accused for its introduction: Niels Bohr. Namely, it is but the ''side product'' of Indivisibility (?wholeness' more frequently in his writings) - not a primitive QM axiom at all.		In his explanation of the Photo-Electric Effect Einstein defines his photons as ?energy quanta which are localised at ''points'' in space? and possessed of a frequency ''E = hv'' at the very same time. (''Rbv/N'' in his text.) Thus we are told that energy is quantized, because rather than a field spreading continuously over a region, ?light is ''discontinuously'' distributed in space?. [Einstein, 1965 (1905), p. 368] Planck's notion of quantization meant the discrete spectrum of eigen states (or eigen frequencies) of a single oscillator, sufficient in itself to make quantization manifest. But in order that a photon can make its own ?quantization' manifest it needs ''another photon''. Alone it is just a speck in space. In Planck's original it would not be enough, it would not even be relevant, to call cars in a car park ?quantized', mainly because they are ?discontinuously distributed in space'. My aunt and I are thus distributed. Are we quantized? To Einstein it seems we must be. Yet, albeit discontinuously distributed at points in space, photons have a ...frequency in this new setting! I cannot even begin to fathom how anything localized at a point can have a frequency, but what I do fathom is how Duality sprang forth from precisely this infected womb, now weirdly impregnated by an unlovely hybrid. To get back to QM as it was initially conceived, I reinterpret ''E = hv'', now ''Et = h'', and ''p = h/l'', now ''pl = h'', as alternative definitions of quantized ''action'', committed to neither waves nor particles. I conclude with what Duality ''really'' was in the mind of the man so wrongly accused for its introduction: Niels Bohr. Namely, it is but the ''side product'' of Indivisibility (?wholeness' more frequently in his writings) - not a primitive QM axiom at all.

	[[Category:Scientific Paper]]		[[Category:Scientific Paper\|einstein 's responsibilities wave-particle duality]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2016-12-30T15:51:45Z

Imported from text file

New page

{{Infobox paper
| title = Einstein\'s Responsibilities for Wave-Particle Duality
| url = [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_6393.pdf Link to paper]
| author = [[Constantin Antonopoulos]]
| published = 2010
| journal = [[Proceedings of the NPA]]
| volume = [[7]]
| number = [[2]]
| num_pages = 9
| pages = 651-659
}}

'''Read the full paper''' [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_6393.pdf here]

==Abstract==

In his explanation of the Photo-Electric Effect Einstein defines his photons as ?energy quanta which are localised at ''points'' in space? and possessed of a frequency ''E = hv'' at the very same time. (''Rbv/N'' in his text.) Thus we are told that energy is quantized, because rather than a field spreading continuously over a region, ?light is ''discontinuously'' distributed in space?. [Einstein, 1965 (1905), p. 368] Planck's notion of quantization meant the discrete spectrum of eigen states (or eigen frequencies) of a single oscillator, sufficient in itself to make quantization manifest. But in order that a photon can make its own ?quantization' manifest it needs ''another photon''. Alone it is just a speck in space. In Planck's original it would not be enough, it would not even be relevant, to call cars in a car park ?quantized', mainly because they are ?discontinuously distributed in space'. My aunt and I are thus distributed. Are we quantized? To Einstein it seems we must be. Yet, albeit discontinuously distributed at points in space, photons have a ...frequency in this new setting! I cannot even begin to fathom how anything localized at a point can have a frequency, but what I do fathom is how Duality sprang forth from precisely this infected womb, now weirdly impregnated by an unlovely hybrid. To get back to QM as it was initially conceived, I reinterpret ''E = hv'', now ''Et = h'', and ''p = h/l'', now ''pl = h'', as alternative definitions of quantized ''action'', committed to neither waves nor particles. I conclude with what Duality ''really'' was in the mind of the man so wrongly accused for its introduction: Niels Bohr. Namely, it is but the ''side product'' of Indivisibility (?wholeness' more frequently in his writings) - not a primitive QM axiom at all.

[[Category:Scientific Paper]]

Einstein's Responsibilities for Wave-Particle Duality - Revision history

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

Maintenance script: Imported from text file