I have not seen this confirmed, but in QM the neutron and optics has much in common and therefore I would assume that Mills analysis for optics also is similar for neutron (I maybe backpedal later on this). I need to check this. Currently I'm not understanding MIlls argument for photons But for charged particles I think it's a clear idea. To add a critique of connet has been that the electron would radiate if it accelerates (change momentum), yes it should, but then a momentum transfer still should remain and Mills includes that in his theory.
Cheers! On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 11:14 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > Self interference has be shown for neutrons. The double slit deminstates > self interference of particles. > > On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Have the double slit been verified for neutrons? Just curious, Mills have >> arguments for photons and charged >> particles as far as I understand. >> >> Regards >> Stefan >> >> On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Any quantum particle obeys the born rule which is a reflection of the >>> wave nature of particles and atoms. Richard Feynman calls this sumation >>> over all hystories. If hydrinos can produce the same results as QM, then >>> hydrinos theory must apply to photons and atoms and neutrons and >>> protons,,,on and on. Confirm or deny, >>> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_integral_formulation >>> >>> On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> If you read the link you see that the QM predictions of intensities and >>>> Mills is essentially the same so for this experiment >>>> there is an overlap. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Stefan >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 9:50 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Does the Mills theory explain the Born rule for two or more slits? >>>>> >>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_rule >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I know that people here challenge Randy Mills theory to explain the >>>>>> result of the double slit experiment. Turns out that BLP has published >>>>>> their hypothesis there for you to read. Consider reading, >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.blacklightpower.com/theory-2/theory/double-slit/ >>>>>> >>>>>> General remark. Quantum mechanics would probably be considered a >>>>>> crackpot theory today if it where not for this experiments that proposed >>>>>> that particles as both a particle property and a wave like property >>>>>> interpreted as a quantum mechanical probability wave. As Faymann said : >>>>>> all >>>>>> QM can be derived from this experiment. >>>>>> >>>>>> Enjoy! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
