5 ms·

What that device is detecting is quantised interaction of light with matter. That is definitely quantised. However this interaction is quantised due to the qu

What that device is detecting is quantised interaction of light with matter. That is definitely quantised. However this interaction is quantised due to the quantised nature of the electron (e.g. the electron wave function can only have certain shapes). There is not good evidence (that I know of at least, maybe I will learn some) that the actual EM field is quantised. As far as special relativity goes, the predictions of Lorentz ether theory and SR are identical. SR is basically a metaphysical theory that discards an absolute reference frame, while Lorentz ether theory keeps it.

red75prime 3y ago
> There is not good evidence (that I know of at least, maybe I will learn some) that the actual EM field is quantised. Is there a classical explanation of entangled photons experiments?
- Ono-Sendai 3y ago
  That would maybe be the best example, quantum entanglement is quite the mystery to me though (and to everyone?). Maybe you can have entangled semi-classical fields? (e.g. fields entangled without intrinsic photon-like particles)
jpmattia 3y ago
> There is not good evidence (that I know of at least, maybe I will learn some) that the actual EM field is quantised. I can't tell if you're pranking us, but of course there is. Without thinking too hard about experimental evidence: squeezed states and the Casimir effect both spring to mind. Hell, the photoelectric effect originally led Einstein directly to the quantization of the EM field. Or Compton scattering as another example.
- Ono-Sendai 3y ago
  The photoelectric effect and Compton scattering can both be explained with a semi-classical theory in which there are no photons. Can try and dig up papers if you are interested. Not familiar with squeezed states. The only quantisation needed in the Casimir effect is boundary-induced quantisation, that EM waves should have, right? EDIT: for example: https://thiscondensedlife.wordpress.com/2019/08/25/ https://thiscondensedlife.wordpress.com/2019/08/25/
  - jpmattia 3y ago
    Yes, let's see references, especially for the multiphoton processes in Compton. > The only quantisation needed in the Casimir effect is boundary-induced quantisation, that EM waves should have, right? No. You need to explain why there is attraction in the absence of EM waves. fyi the various noise measurements from squeezed states might hold interest for you.
    - Ono-Sendai 3y ago
      You can have vacuum fluctuations without photons. EDIT: will try and find Compton paper later, going for walk now.
      - defrost 3y ago
        Looking forward to your return, I'll be making popcorn :-) Nice to see a stand taken on uncommon ground.
      - jpmattia 3y ago
        > You can have vacuum fluctuations without photons. Casimir is not about fluctuations. There is an attraction between metal plates in the absence of electromagnetic radiation. And as I think it through, an even simpler example is the laser. Bose-Einstein statistics require that you have indistinguishable particles to multiply occupy a state. Without the indistinguishability, you don't end up with the right statistics. Without the right statistics, you don't end up with the right Einstein rate equations, and you'll be missing the stimulated emission term. Without that term, you will be missing the lasing action, as well as secondary effects such as noise statistics.
    - Ono-Sendai 3y ago
      Oh apparently it was Schrodinger himself that wrote about a semiclassical Compton scattering approach: http://www.regels.org/Compton-effect.htm http://www.regels.org/Compton-effect.htm
      - jpmattia 3y ago
pdonis 3y ago
> There is not good evidence (that I know of at least, maybe I will learn some) that the actual EM field is quantised. Yes, there is: we can make Fock states of the EM field in the laboratory. Such states can only exist if the EM field is quantized. More generally, phenomena like bunching and antibunching are only possible if the EM field is quantized. Quantization of matter alone is not enough.

red75prime 3y ago

> There is not good evidence (that I know of at least, maybe I will learn some) that the actual EM field is quantised. Is there a classical explanation of entangled photons experiments?

Ono-Sendai 3y ago
That would maybe be the best example, quantum entanglement is quite the mystery to me though (and to everyone?). Maybe you can have entangled semi-classical fields? (e.g. fields entangled without intrinsic photon-like particles)

jpmattia 3y ago

> There is not good evidence (that I know of at least, maybe I will learn some) that the actual EM field is quantised. I can't tell if you're pranking us, but of course there is. Without thinking too hard about experimental evidence: squeezed states and the Casimir effect both spring to mind. Hell, the photoelectric effect originally led Einstein directly to the quantization of the EM field. Or Compton scattering as another example.

Ono-Sendai 3y ago
The photoelectric effect and Compton scattering can both be explained with a semi-classical theory in which there are no photons. Can try and dig up papers if you are interested. Not familiar with squeezed states. The only quantisation needed in the Casimir effect is boundary-induced quantisation, that EM waves should have, right? EDIT: for example: https://thiscondensedlife.wordpress.com/2019/08/25/ https://thiscondensedlife.wordpress.com/2019/08/25/
- jpmattia 3y ago
  Yes, let's see references, especially for the multiphoton processes in Compton. > The only quantisation needed in the Casimir effect is boundary-induced quantisation, that EM waves should have, right? No. You need to explain why there is attraction in the absence of EM waves. fyi the various noise measurements from squeezed states might hold interest for you.
  - Ono-Sendai 3y ago
    You can have vacuum fluctuations without photons. EDIT: will try and find Compton paper later, going for walk now.
    - defrost 3y ago
      Looking forward to your return, I'll be making popcorn :-) Nice to see a stand taken on uncommon ground.
    - jpmattia 3y ago
      > You can have vacuum fluctuations without photons. Casimir is not about fluctuations. There is an attraction between metal plates in the absence of electromagnetic radiation. And as I think it through, an even simpler example is the laser. Bose-Einstein statistics require that you have indistinguishable particles to multiply occupy a state. Without the indistinguishability, you don't end up with the right statistics. Without the right statistics, you don't end up with the right Einstein rate equations, and you'll be missing the stimulated emission term. Without that term, you will be missing the lasing action, as well as secondary effects such as noise statistics.
  - Ono-Sendai 3y ago
    Oh apparently it was Schrodinger himself that wrote about a semiclassical Compton scattering approach: http://www.regels.org/Compton-effect.htm http://www.regels.org/Compton-effect.htm
    - jpmattia 3y ago

pdonis 3y ago

> There is not good evidence (that I know of at least, maybe I will learn some) that the actual EM field is quantised. Yes, there is: we can make Fock states of the EM field in the laboratory. Such states can only exist if the EM field is quantized. More generally, phenomena like bunching and antibunching are only possible if the EM field is quantized. Quantization of matter alone is not enough.