Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> >   You are the one saying that wave interference somehow must imply that
> > sometimes it cancels itself out. That's just not true. Basic math.

> Except there *are* spots in the interference pattern between two slits 
> (if you place them properly) where no electron lands.

> The electron isn't interfering with itself (or other electrons) in the 
> same way a wave interferes with itself.

  I honestly don't understand. It looks a lot to me like your two
consecutive paragraphs are saying the exact opposite things.

> And there's no medium to be waving.

  Medium? Are we back to the luminiferous aether era? I thought it was
demonstrated almost a hundred years ago that waves don't necessarily
need a medium.

> You're looking at a pattern of events, seeing that its mathematical 
> equation matches in some ways the mathematical equation of the height of 
> a wave, and you're saying "hence, the phenomenon must be a wave."

  Actually no. What I'm saying is "it behaves like a wave".

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message