View allAll Photos Tagged Wave
I might have over processed these but I wanted to try to see what I could pull out of these backlit images.
Looking down at the breaking waves, it was nice to capture some of the gulls floating over the breaking waves.
BLUE WAVE - This morning Pearl and I hiked the Spanish Bay Trail, in Pacific Grove, CA. It was beautiful skies, but windy cold. Waves were awesome...rcondetArt c2018
Agriculture on Prince Edward Island is most associated with potatoes, but many other crops are grown on the island including canola, corn, soybeans, and wheat.
Barely any of my Hawaii photos are on here.
Check my dA for all of them runawaywolf.deviantart.com/gallery/10460469
Really liked the colour contrast in this view between the deep blue sky, the thin band of dark blue water, the aquamarine then the wave breaking onto golden sand.
en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Quantum_theory_of_observation/Quant...
Quantum theory of observation - Thierry Dugnolle
Quantum physics for dummies
Fundamental principles and concepts
Examples of measurements
Entanglement
General theory of measurement
The forest of destinies
The appearance of relative classical worlds in the quantum Universe
Quantum entanglement is the fundamental concept to explain the reality of observation.
---
Wave-particle duality
Is light a flow of particles or a wave phenomenon ? Light rays could be particle paths and they were regarded thus by Newton in his Optics. Light reflection in a mirror is then naturally interpreted with the hypothesis that particles of light, or photons, are like bouncing balls. Nevertheless Huygens argued that this phenomenon and others were better interpreted with the hypothesis that light rays are perpendicular lines to wave fronts.
Photography gives an evidence of the existence of particles of light, for traces left by light are always like impacts of particles.
But if light is made of particles how can we explain interference patterns such as those found by Young and Fresnel ? Interference is always interference between waves. It seems there can not be any interference with particles. An interference pattern is an experimental evidence that light is a wave phenomenon. It is confirmed by Maxwell's theory of electomagnetism, which defines light as an electromagnetic wave.
That light be made of particles is not contradicted by the existence of interference patterns. Here is what we can see if we look at how an interference pattern appears on a photographic plate (see photo - animated in original publication)
The wave phenomenon, interference, results from impacts of particles.
The superposition principle gives a very direct explanation of wave-particle duality. Any physical system is a particle or a system of particles, but these behave sometimes like waves because they can be in many places at the same time. The wave of a particle or of a system of particles determines its diffuse presence.
---
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
seop.illc.uva.nl/entries/qt-entangle/
1. Quantum Entanglement
In 1935 and 1936, Schrödinger published a two-part article in the Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society in which he discussed and extended an argument by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen. The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) argument was, in many ways, the culmination of Einstein’s critique of the orthodox Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics and was designed to show that the theory is incomplete. (See the entries on the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen argument in quantum theory and the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics.)
In classical mechanics the state of a system is essentially a list of the system’s properties — more precisely, it is the specification of a set of parameters from which the list of properties can be reconstructed: the positions and momenta of all the particles comprising the system (or similar parameters in the case of fields).
The dynamics of the theory specifies how properties change in terms of a law of evolution for the state. In a letter to Max Born, Wolfgang Pauli characterized this mode of description of physical systems as a ‘detached observer’ idealization (see The Born-Einstein Letters, Born, 1992; p. 218).
On the Copenhagen interpretation, such a description is not possible for quantum systems. Instead, the quantum state of a system should be understood as a catalogue of what an observer has done to the system and what has been observed, and the import of the state then lies in the probabilities that can be inferred (in terms of the theory) for the outcomes of possible future observations on the system.
Einstein rejected this view and proposed a series of arguments to show that the quantum state is simply an incomplete characterization of a quantum system. The missing parameters are sometimes referred to as ‘hidden parameters’ or ‘hidden variables.’
It should not be supposed that Einstein’s notion of a complete theory included the requirement that the theory should be deterministic. Rather, he required certain conditions of separability and locality for composite systems consisting of separated component systems: each component system separately should be characterized by its own properties (its own ‘being-thus,’ as Einstein put it — ‘So-sein’ in German), and it should be impossible to alter the properties of a distant system instantaneously (or the probabilities of these properties) by acting on a local system.
In later analyses, notably in Bell’s argument for the nonlocality of quantum correlations, it became apparent that these conditions, suitably formulated as probability constraints, are equivalent to the requirement that statistical correlations between separated systems should be reducible to probability distributions over common causes (deterministic or stochastic) in the sense of Reichenbach. (See the entries on Bell’s theorem and Reichenbach’s common cause principle.)