what is Evolution

Results of physical experiments relating the information potential of sub-atomic-units


In animate world life-beings determine their behaviour according to the information gathered from their surroundings.
As the 2-slit experiment with varying slit-distances show, the subatomic particles determine their behaviour also in accordance to the calculations regarding their wavelength relative to the path-length-differences.
Two-Slit Experiments indicate that sub-atomic-units are interacting with their environment in a heterarchic way.
As shown in figure 2A, a light source is placed at point S and a special photon detector at D, in a distance of ca 1m. Between them is a screen. A slit in point A is inserted on this screen, so big that from 100 photons sent from source S, only 1 can pass through. Another slit with the same size can be opened at B. When slit A is closed, then only 1 of 100 photons reaches the detector at D (Feynman 1985 )

Now when both slits are open, one should expect that 2 photons should be registered at detector D. But this is not the case. The number of incident photons at detector D varies, depending on path length difference between SAD and SBD, as shown in the figure. Sometimes 4 photons are registered, some times 3, 2, 1 or nothing at all!  But there exist a very regular relationship between photon incidence, wavelength of photons and their target. (Feynman 1985 )

Figure 15. Two-slit experiment. Photon’s arrival at detector depends on difference of path-lengths (B), with probabilistic calculations of photons with their wave lengths (C). Redrawn after Feynmann 1985.

The calculation of photon incidence happens according the following rules.
1-           The sub-atomic-particles like photons or electrons behave either as a wave or as a particle. They behave as wave when they are free in their behaviour, as in this 2-slit experiment. They can make any choice between the slits A or B to go to target D. Hence they feel themselves free and behave as wave.
2-           All waves have a propagation structure like a sine curve, as shown in figure 2C. They start with a median amplitude value like 0 (zero), increase gradually to their maximum (1), decrease to a minimum value (–1), and then increase again to their initial value.

3-           A photon intending to go to the target D, compares the two possible paths. It measures the path SAD with its wavelength, starting with zero and increasing 0.1, 0.2, 0.3,…, 1 (max), 0.9, 0.8, …, 0, .. -0.3, … -0.9, -1 (min), ..,-0.7, …, 0. After each full length, it begins to count again. When the target is reached, the counted value amplitude is registered, be it 1 (max) for this path length.
4-           Then the other path is measured in similar manner. The obtained amplitude value, be it 1 (max) for this path too.
5-           These values are added together: 1 + 1 = 2
6-           The square of 2 is 4. In this case 4 photons can be registered at D. 
When the sum of values are zero, as in the case (–1) + 1 = 0, then no photons are detected at the D.
The most important point here is the fact that values less than “one” get ever smaller by their rise to second power (square), whereas values greater than “one” get ever greater by their rise to second power (square). Hence, probabilistic calculations are greatly appreciated by all natural developments, and there is not any development like “a predestination or a random development” in nature.
But when they are not free in their behaviour, for example, when detectors are placed at the slits, to determine which path they get, they don’t use their wave behaviour. This is an other clear indication that the subatomic components behave knowingly (consciously); otherwise they could not know the existence of the detectors (Feynman 1985).
There are many other experiments showing such a cognitive-conscious behaviour like “Experimental Realization of Wheeler’s Delayed-Choice Gedanken Experiment” carried out by Jacques et al. (2007). 


Reflection rate experiments indicate that energy storage depends on the structure and texture of matters

Feynman (1985) gave the following enlightening experimental data about the relations between matters and energy carrying photons.
From 100 emitted photons, about 4% are reflected from the surface of a thick glass block and 96% enter the glass; however, if the glass is thin relative to the wavelength of the photons, then the ratio of reflectance varies between zero and 16%, depending on the thickness of the glass (Feynman 1985).

Figure 16: Photons as primary energy packs determine their target, according to a probabilistic calculation, being dependent on structure, texture and composition of matters. (From Feynman 1985)

Photons measure the path difference between the upper and lower surfaces of the glass slide (being dependent on thickness of the glass) and compare it with their wavelength (Figure 3).

A photon destined to arrive at the target D may take one of two possible paths.  It compares the two possible paths as described in the 2-slit experiment. According to the results (being in resonance or dissonance of the respective paths relative to its wavelength), it makes probabilistic calculations and behaves between a minimum or maximum value, here 0 or 16.



Figure17. Photons compare the path measurements with their waves and make probabilistic calculations. Until the glass reaches a certain thickness, the amounts of photon capture at D vary. However, once the glass thickness reaches a certain value, then a fixed value is established and retained. This behaviour is called order-parameter development and solidification in dynamical systems (Haken 1983, 2000). (Compiled after the data from Feynman 1985.)

These are energy-carriers (photons) who decide with their wavelengths where to invest more, and where to store less energy. And materials change their structure to adjust their energy requirements according to the wave lengths of energy-carriers (photons). Wave-lengths of photons vary according to the equation h.f=m0c2. (h= Planck constant, f= freqeunce, m0rest mass of the unit, c= light-speed in vacuum)   In this manner an intertwined energy-matter interaction and mutual inter-dependency system develops.


Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox (EPR-effect) and Bell- Theorem, as evidence of informative and conscious behaviour of sub-atomic-units

Quantum mechanics allows assumptions to be made of the same probabilistic outcomes at different localities. This is a contradiction to the special relativity theory of Einstein, which predicts that no information can be transmitted faster then the speed of light. Therefore  Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen wrote an article “Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?” against the quantum mechanical assumptions. Their argument was:
When entangled particles produced from a source are sent with light-speed in two opposite direction, say to Bob and Alice, and Bob and Alice make measurements to determine which spin the particle s(he) got has, quantum mechanics predicts a 100% correlation between their measurements. That is contrary to the special relativity theory.
To resolve this controversy Bell (1964) proposed his “Bell’s inequality test” theorem: “On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox”.  Aspect et al.(1982) carried out this experiment and showed that subatomic particles behave as if they have a magic information system between them, enabling them to correlate their behaviours simultaneously, determining how far they may be apart from one other. Therefore all beings in nature are tightly interconnected and a mutual interdependence exists between them, then all particles created and radiated from a source are entangled with each other.
The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox, proposed to invalidate the quantum theory, provided one of the most important cornerstones of quantum mechanics, known as the EPR- effect.
If we consider the exponential nature of information development predicting a basic cognitive and conscious behaviour to the smallest components of matters, we should not be surprised by those results. (See Supplement translated from Gedik 2008)


The strength of force-fields changes according to the structural composition of materials.

Experiments carried out by Eigler at IBM laboratories revealed very interesting results. He arranged cobalt atoms in an elliptical form on a copper substrate Figure (A). Another cobalt atom is placed on the left focal point, whereas the right focal point is left void.

 When the electromagnetic field potential of this arrangement was determined, the field-strength was as shown on figure (B) (Manoharan et al 2000). Field-strength was very strongly developed at the focal points; even at the right focal point, although void, the field potential was much more strongly developed than on other cobalt atoms. Randomly or circular arranged atoms are shown at (C). At lower left corner a randomly placed atom, and in the adjacent area circularly oriented atoms are placed. There no extra-ordinary field developments.

This experiment shows:
1-                   that randomly distributed atomic elements do not collect as much energy as elliptically ordered elements.
2-                   that energy flows to significant locations like the focal points.
This is a clear indication of the role of material structure and composition in the determination of force fields. It is the composition and structure of materials that attract the energy carriers of the subatomic world, as shown in Figure (B). 

To continue:

No comments:

Post a Comment