wave-particle duality and TV reception

On 19/12/2014 15:28, Terry Casey wrote:
In ,
says...

Assembler (in two different flavours, one for maintaining inherited code
and another for new applications) came first, for an IBM1401. Then I
did systems analysis for a few years before going back to programming.
The list was illustrative, not a complete CV. I also didn't include
Ferranti Argus Assembler

Ah - would that have been APRIL?

Argus PRogramming Instruction Language ...(I think!)

Where I worked at the time, it was just called "Code".
I don't remember much of it now, and the machines I wrote it for went
into a skip long ago, so it is not a reusable skill.

Jim

On Sat, 13 Dec 2014 13:44:10 +0000, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Dec 2014 11:09:05 +0000, brightside S9
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 11:57:01 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Waves, particles, neither, both? Who knows?

Treating EM waves as "waves" makes the maths easier,(for some value of easier), for calculating aerial lengths, diffraction, etc.

But you can turn it around and say something like:-
The transmitter emits a stream of photons, some of which bang into the recieving aerial and knock electrons out of their orbits around the atoms. These bang into the next atom up, and then the next, and if you get enough of them, you end up with an electric current to feed into the receiver.
Simples!

It was a good program, though. Except I got lost at Bell's inequality.


Try this:
http://www.upscale.utoronto.ca/PVB/H...lsTheorem.html

John Stewart Bell (of the theorem) was born and educated in Belfast.
There was a attempt recently to name a street in his honour. That came
to grief because there is a policy of not naming streets after people.
However, it has now been agreed to name the street after the theorem. It
will be Bell's Theorem Crescent.

The formalities were completed and a street name sign produced. There
was an official ceremony about a week ago involving people from the
buildings in Bell's Theorem Crescent, John Bell's brother and sister,
and the Lord Mayor of Belfast.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-31536765

This photo shows them holding the sign ready for a ribbon-cutting
ceremony.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-31536765

There is an unusual-looking apostrophe between the l and the s of
"Bell's". One of the people involved in the ceremony explained that the
City Council has a rule against punctuation in street names so the sign
came without an apostrophe. The man said he had improvised the
apostrophe with black insulating tape.


--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

On Sunday, 14 December 2014 17:01:18 UTC, Peter Crosland wrote:
On 14/12/2014 13:53, wrote:
On Saturday, 13 December 2014 17:12:41 UTC, Peter Crosland wrote:
On 11/12/2014 05:25, Bill Wright wrote:
The whole science of RF seems to be based on wave theory. Does particle
theory have any place?

Discuss.

This a good starting point.

How to teach quantum physics to your dog.

ISBN 1851687793

If a dog can understand it......................

--
Peter Crosland

Reply address is valid

£6.29 from BookDepository Thanks for the tip.
Cheeers, Ian.

You are welcome. I would be interested to hear how you get on with it.
It is an incredibly difficult concept to understand and I am not sur if
I do having read several books on the subject.


--
Peter Crosland

Reply address is valid
It's a facinating take on things, but it does lead you into a false sense of security. You're reading away, thinking that this is interesting stuff, and then BANG, you're hit with Bell's theorem and non-locality. Now, I've come across non-locality before, (and didn't understand it), but it still leaves you wondering what on earth is going on.
I'm going to have to read that bit again.
Cheers, ian.

On 27/02/2015 14:00, wrote:
On Sunday, 14 December 2014 17:01:18 UTC, Peter Crosland wrote:
On 14/12/2014 13:53, wrote:
On Saturday, 13 December 2014 17:12:41 UTC, Peter Crosland wrote:
On 11/12/2014 05:25, Bill Wright wrote:
The whole science of RF seems to be based on wave theory. Does particle
theory have any place?

Discuss.

This a good starting point.

How to teach quantum physics to your dog.

ISBN 1851687793

If a dog can understand it......................

--
Peter Crosland

Reply address is valid

£6.29 from BookDepository Thanks for the tip.
Cheeers, Ian.

You are welcome. I would be interested to hear how you get on with it.
It is an incredibly difficult concept to understand and I am not sur if
I do having read several books on the subject.


--
Peter Crosland

Reply address is valid
It's a facinating take on things, but it does lead you into a false sense of security. You're reading away, thinking that this is interesting stuff, and then BANG, you're hit with Bell's theorem and non-locality. Now, I've come across non-locality before, (and didn't understand it), but it still leaves you wondering what on earth is going on.
I'm going to have to read that bit again.

My dog loved it!


--
Peter Crosland

Reply address is valid

wrote:

It's a facinating take on things, but it does lead you into a false
sense of security. You're reading away, thinking that this is
interesting stuff, and then BANG, you're hit with Bell's theorem
and non-locality. Now, I've come across non-locality before, (and
didn't understand it), but it still leaves you wondering what on
earth is going on. I'm going to have to read that bit again.

I'll just give a shout for the best popular TV presentation that I've ever
seem for the issue. Jim Al-Khalili's "The Secrets of Quantum Physics"
Episode 1 "Einstein's Nightmare". It deserved better promotion than being
hidden away on BBC4. I thought it was only broadcast a couple of months
back but it seems to have disappeared from iPlayer. Somebody's uploaded
it to Dailymotion, though:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2d...nightmare_tech

Dave Farrance wrote:

the best popular TV presentation that I've ever seem for the issue.
Jim Al-Khalili's "The Secrets of Quantum Physics" Episode 1
"Einstein's Nightmare".

I think this thread started after the showing of that programme ...

"Dave Farrance" wrote in
message ...
wrote:

It's a facinating take on things, but it does lead you into a false
sense of security. You're reading away, thinking that this is
interesting stuff, and then BANG, you're hit with Bell's theorem
and non-locality. Now, I've come across non-locality before, (and
didn't understand it), but it still leaves you wondering what on
earth is going on. I'm going to have to read that bit again.

I'll just give a shout for the best popular TV presentation that
I've ever
seem for the issue. Jim Al-Khalili's "The Secrets of Quantum
Physics"
Episode 1 "Einstein's Nightmare". It deserved better promotion than
being
hidden away on BBC4. I thought it was only broadcast a couple of
months
back but it seems to have disappeared from iPlayer. Somebody's
uploaded
it to Dailymotion, though:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2d...nightmare_tech


Quite brilliant series from a presenter who really does understand how
to 'get it across.'


--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com

On Sun, 1 Mar 2015 10:38:08 -0000, "Woody"
wrote:


"Dave Farrance" wrote in
message ...
wrote:

It's a facinating take on things, but it does lead you into a false
sense of security. You're reading away, thinking that this is
interesting stuff, and then BANG, you're hit with Bell's theorem
and non-locality. Now, I've come across non-locality before, (and
didn't understand it), but it still leaves you wondering what on
earth is going on. I'm going to have to read that bit again.

I'll just give a shout for the best popular TV presentation that
I've ever
seem for the issue. Jim Al-Khalili's "The Secrets of Quantum
Physics"
Episode 1 "Einstein's Nightmare". It deserved better promotion than
being
hidden away on BBC4. I thought it was only broadcast a couple of
months
back but it seems to have disappeared from iPlayer. Somebody's
uploaded
it to Dailymotion, though:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2d...nightmare_tech


Quite brilliant series from a presenter who really does understand how
to 'get it across.'

Yes, I rather liked the idea of the 'Quantum Robin' and the 'Quantum
Nose' as explained in the second episode. Now we can each all boast
about possessing a 'Quantum Nose'. :-)
--
J B Good

On Thursday, 11 December 2014 05:25:36 UTC, Bill Wright wrote:
The whole science of RF seems to be based on wave theory. Does particle
theory have any place?

Discuss.

Bill

Well, this turned up on the Register this morning...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/03...materialis m/

Cheers, ian.

wrote:

Well, this turned up on the Register this morning...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/03...materialis m/

Hmmm. It doesn't actually add anything to our understanding of what's
going on regarding the wave-particle duality, but they have discovered a
new way to make pretty pictures. Polaritons are quasi-particles, i.e. a
mathematical construct of electromagnetic-wave behaviour in a
non-free-space environment, and are a useful mathematical tool for
designing instruments, but they take you further away from understanding
the underlying reality. Pretty pictures can be useful, though, because
better imaging allows you to set up further experiments, as in the example
they give, to study routes to quantum computing.