Is Light A Particle Or A Wave? 

When there are two observers, they are particles. If not, they are waves. If dimensions in particles are time dimensions, their change can change time instantly. Suppose the time dimensions can entangle between particles and observers. When we observe/see or measure a time dimension (when we interact with a dimension of a quantum object), that can probably entangle and change the time dimensions in both particles and observers at once. So the double-slit experiment is showing us something like a magic trick. However, the double-slit experiment showed us that the previous state in the quantum objects changed once we measured it. But during the double-slit experiment, the observer observes waves of Electrons. When Electrons hit the screen, the screen becomes another observer. And then, both the screen and the first observer (the detector) would detect particles of Electrons on instant quantum entanglements between those two observers. If we look at it like that, we can guess that the quantum objects behave like particles when observers are unentangled. And they act like waves when there is only one observer (which is entangled to itself. Perhaps splitting the screen would unentangle it). Arguably, the dimensional sets and wave functions show the possibility of explaining that process. Suppose electric and magnetic moments in Electrons separate when the detector observes it. Then the magnetic moment can continue until it can find an electric moment on the screen or vice versa. And then a magnetic moment in the screen would go back to the Electron at the detector instantly using quantum entanglements, making two separate Electrons as complete Electrons again. But when we don't use a detector/observer, the screen becomes the only observer that can detect probabilistic positions of Electrons as waves on it. The observation is likely an interaction or interference that damages the structure of Electrons, observers, etc. We observe outputs of that damage (at the detector) with the final exchange between Electrons (on the screen). It is a logical explanation. Perhaps, a developed experiment would be able to confirm it. Thank you so much for the profound explanations.

I imagine it’s similar to Heisenberg’s uncertainty principal; typically, an electron can be said to be everyone around an atom all at once, but as soon as we observe it, the electron falls into a single, stable position because the light bouncing off our eyes interacts with the electron. In the case of the double slit experiment, a similar phenomenon could be happening with the particles of light when they are being observed

mind blowing! we've briefly discussed the young experiment in my physics class but without the dull, boring definitions and the burden of grades and assignments its way easier to enjoy. keep up the good work, this channel is surely going places!

Very Interesting Video, I distinctly remember Michio Kaku, Explaining String field theory, He was inspired to pursue a career in physics after seeing a photo of Einstein's desk at the time of his death. He had been unable to complete his unified field theory, And has dedicated his life to solving this theory, I really enjoy hearing what this man has to say in discussing such subjects, Thank you Ardit, Russ and all the great folks that make this a favorite channel, Cheers. 👍

Imagine being able to view all wavelengths at will and block out whichever ones u didn't want to see, like if u wanted to view in thermal and xray u just tell ur brain.

The simplest explanation is that light is a wave with particle characteristics as a probabilistic future unfolds photon by photon. This idea is supported by the fact that light photon ∆E=hf energy is continuously transforming potential energy into the kinetic Eₖ=½mv² energy of matter, in the form of electrons. Kinetic energy is the energy of what is actually ‘happening’. The dynamic geometry of this process forms an uncertain ∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π probabilistic future continuously unfolding relative to the electron probability cloud of the atoms and the wavelength of the light.

When we are in a movie, we are like a wave. When we stop the movie, we are a picture or particle. What constitutes or defines an "observer"? The back of the screen? A detector? Would there be a way to measure without an observer? I have a hard time understanding how they know without observation. A quanta packet makes more sense. Both a particle and a wave. Whatever happens to the individual photon and its behavior would have to be at its birth. It is a reaction to us. Entanglement is when photon gets split then observed one will be up spin so the other will be down spin. Right glove left glove scenario. Once mixed up you don't know what glove you have until you look then you know the other glove. I don't see the mystery.

I want to know how exactly it travels as both. Is it particle that travels like wave or a wave that travels like particle?

Like gravitational waves, all moving objects create waves in fabric of Space. These waves are temporary in nature which dissipate as soon as object stops. Like boat object moves as object-wave system. Space waves travel at light speed & are ahead of object except light where particle & wave have same speed & photon moves as single wave-particle unit. Due microscopic size of particle wave changes its path causing interference pattern. During motion particle always remains a particle except that it has a wave associated with it.

If light behaves like a wave when we are not watching it, then how do we know it's acting like a wave since we are not watching?

Ocean waves with longer periods carry more energy and travel faster. In contrast, light maintains a constant speed; the shorter the period, the more energy it exhibits during collapse. Therefore, it cannot be described as a wave, but an alternative term may be utilized.

I think if that experiment would be replaced with a canon sand( not laser canon) would happen the same thing. It means : the experiment doesn't show anything because sand is particle, that( same thing ) would happen with all things as : water, sugar grain,salt grain, sand grain etc...( the photon doesn t interfere with itself but crashes with border of slit part (ricocheted the lips/borders of the slit )

Could light and matter in the form of electrons be wave over a ‘period of time’ and have particle characteristics relative to the atoms of the Periodic Table when we have the absorption and emission of light? Is the exchange of light photon ∆E=hf energy continuously transforming potential energy into the kinetic Eₖ=½mv² energy of matter, in the form of electrons, as an uncertain ∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π probabilistic future unfolds?

Doesn’t the act of observation visually freeze the exited (vibrating) photon and therefore make it appear like a particle?

Lumina si in general ceeace se cheama unda sau radiatie e-m, este structura dinamica similara motorului electric liniar, constituita din circulatiile in planuri perpendiculare ale campului electric si magnetic si propulsate in lunecare hidrodinamica, prin materia inponderala a vidului, de catre forta electromagnetica. Forta care la nivelul fiecarei semiunde, este la echilibru cu farta de inertie. (B.I.L=m.a). Ceeace face translatia uniforma si rectilinie a structurilor dinamice prin vid si face sa para ca propagarea undelor. Light, and in general what is called a wave or e-m radiation, is a dynamic structure similar to the linear electric motor, consisting of the circulations in perpendicular planes of the electric and magnetic field and propelled in hydrodynamic sliding, through the weightless matter of the vacuum, by the electromagnetic force. The force that at the level of each half-wave is in balance with the inertia force. (B.I.L=m.a). What makes the translation of the dynamic structures uniform and rectilinear through the vacuum and makes it appear like the propagation of waves.

See, this is where I get all screwed up.. if you don't observe it how do you know it is wave like.. that to me is like, say, that brick wall over there, it is made of brick as long as you look at it.. But the minute you don't look at it any more it is made of what? something else.. Once I can wrap my mind around this idea it will be easier for me to move on.. But I have been trying to understand it for decades now.. It reminds me of the old stoner days when we all would say that there in nothing behind you. the only things that exist are the things you can see and once you can't see it any more it is gone.. When you turn back it all comes back to reality.. I just love this stuff Ardit.. that thing about something being something else when you don't see it is the only hang up I really have. Carry on gang this place is really cooking now.. all the coolest stuff happening here.. and I am glad to be part of this wild ride..!!!

Explanation for double slit could be that the light, when not observed is not, or is less excited and therefore is acting like a wave, even if only one particle, as the photon is simply a piece of a field a single piece reverting to field-like behavior when no longer excited by observation/interaction via a detector isn’t strange.

Light behaves as both a particle and a wave, which is a concept known as wave-particle duality. This duality is a fundamental principle in quantum mechanics. When considering light as a particle, it's described as a photon-a packet of energy that behaves like a particle in certain experiments, for instance, in the photoelectric effect. On the other hand, light exhibits wave-like properties, such as interference and diffraction patterns, which are typical of waves. This behavior is observed in experiments like the double-slit experiment, where light displays interference patterns characteristic of waves. So, in summary, whether light behaves as a particle or a wave depends on the specific experiment or observation being conducted. Quantum mechanics has shown that both descriptions are necessary to fully understand the behavior of light.

I have a question, according to Isaac Newton, the nature of gravity actually affects things that have mass. We know that in a black hole, light bends under the influence of gravity. Does light have mass? Or is the effect of gravity on light not according to the definition of gravity?

It depends on the light. There are thousands of different kinds of light in existence. Some are more solidified as photons and others are waves or lines. And some can only travel under certain circumstances. Even then, there's the many different ways of manipulating or using the many different types and energy levels, of light. I try to show people how to have endless clean energy via gasless and oiless self running generators and nano tech, but it usually gets blocked or deleted immediately.

in short words, we have no idea : )

The ubiquitous rhetoric of quantum mechanics being 'weird' drives me up a wall. That the earth is round, that a body in motion tends to stay in motion, and the transmutation of species are all "weird" and counter-intuitive at first but Archimedes, Newton, Darwin and their proteges didn't spend a century talking about how "weird" the theories were. To be clear, I have no quarrel with the models themselves which have explained the observed phenomena better than anything else, rather it's the mystical occultish way that quantum physics is spoken about which drives me up a wall. "particle" and "wave" cannot be predicated of the same substance univocally. However, "particle" and "wave" are predicated of electrons equivocally, not univocally. We speak of an electron as being a particle and wave almost by way of analogy; it is abundantly clear that these every day concepts, while helpful in some respects, do not capture the entirety of the nature of the thing. So it is not at all weird or paradoxical that it can be equivocally predicated of both "particle" and "wave" because the predication is equivocal.

Did the split experiment show that light is a wave or that light particles bounce into each other at different angles?

Light is a wave. Oooh hear me out..... All EM spectra are waves. This wasn't an issue until the photoelectric effect came on the scene and put "particle" back on the table. Oscillations of the fabric of spacetime. If you look at E=hv as h- spacetime (planks constant) multiplied bt the frequency- v..... I see "Photon" as a measurement of this differential. Look just because there was an avalanche doseny mean the trigger event was physical contact. The "impact" can be a vibration and produce the same outcome. Whereas; the electron is a Particle. It is morei pattern of more than one vibration of spacetime. There emerges the "fishnet" construct of energy warping and Carrying a wash of spacetime along, creating a differential we perceive as a separate particle. Like a bubble....that can...oh i dunno...pilot a wave. This also means spacetime is "shuttled around" 😮 i,ll tell ya about gravity and how black holes expand the entirety of the universe another random day on a different random forum.

how do you observe light(photon)? you hit it with another particle to be detected, that interaction with light will convert the photon from wave to a particle hence the result.

Love, breath, sight, matter, everything is a wave. It’s not about the matter, it’s the anti-matter that strings everything together

1. What makes light a very strange concept in science? (2 POINTS) 2. Who said that light is a wave? (1 POINT) 3. Who said that light is a particle? (1 POINT) 4. How will you differentiate reflection and refraction in simple words? (2 POINTS) 5. In the double slit experiment of Thomas Young, what is formed when the light passed in the two slits? (1 POINT) 6. In the string theory, what makes the photon and quark differ from one another in terms on how they are formed? (1 POINT) 7. How can you say that light behave as a wave and as a particle? Justify your answer (2 POINTS)

what is the difference between supernova and hypernova?

When you learn about young double slit experiment, you realize that it actually is a genius idea.

What is Light? : 4:31

So you're saying that the observer determines the outcome. If the observer (any form of recording, of a partical) observer's the experiment, then it forms as a point in time that we as humans can understand? If that's the case, then It's probably better to say; Everything acts as a wave until it's observed.

they are particles(photon), that act like waves simple as that

Are refraction and gravitational lensing sisters?

If matter/particle are made of strings with different oscillation then How strings are formed at first place? We say fields excitation but what is basis of field itself? It all gets out of my head Will we be ever able to reach the "reality"? I think particle and waves are manifestation of same thing but what is it? And i also think reality does not depend on probabilities (like QM says) at which point do probabilities change to reality. Thank you sir for your content (i am subscribed)

Neither, or both? String Theory was not a waste of time. Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: "A theory that you can't explain to a bartender is probably no damn good." Ernest Rutherford The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics? When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks. (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Force" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry. Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Mesons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons? Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension? Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons . Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. We know there is an unequal distribution of electrical charge within each atom because the positive charge is concentrated within the nucleus, even though the overall electrical charge of the atom is balanced by equal positive and negative charge. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist. The model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles. .

It's our eyes that change. Our brains are making the difference. That's how are brains deal with quantum realities. There are so many more mysteries of the human mind than anything else.

Tube light emits photons i.e., light doesn't have a wave motion

Light is wonderful but I can't see anything right now my heart is dark with sadness, my family is toxic and it's poisoning my light, I know that I have to find a way fora way out but for now it's best to be hidden in the dark.

Both, photons are solitons, objects with wave properties. Such objects are common in nature, nothing weird at all.

as a doctor of medicine with no idea of maths, physics etc, I think a photon is a massless quantum particle where as we know the speed, its position can not be defined precisely. Highest probability of its position with the current energy level draws a wave function and resultantly wave lenght. Please don't lough if I talked nonsense.

Particles that make up a wave

Im probably too stupid to be commenting and i understand how what im saying is preety weird and maybe unreasonable but what if light behaves like particles because the rest of the matter that makes the wave gets attracted to us? I mean i know we basicly have no gravitational force but 0.1 isint 0 and when we talk about nano particles well then it could matter. The downside of this is that im not exacly sure how they made the experiment, if it was in a vaccum sealed box or something, but what im trying to get to is that when we arent looking we see all the particles when we are some of them are missing, well they cant just dissapear, my guess is that we ourselfs and the stuff around us catches it. As you can see by my comment tho, im not a scientist, far from it, so if anyone with actual knowlage wants to teach me somthing, leave a comment explaining why its wrong :D i would love to learn about this

Particles a little bit shy

Have you researched and gained understanding of it or you just reiterated what physics popularizers say?

What if it is a wave but carries with it some photons or quanta

it is definitively a wave

If light is a wave then it will travel in zig zag manner,but then why it travels in a straight line??

But its electrons that both behave like waves and particles and not light right because electrons are not light

I'll be alright especially when I leave the toxicity.

When we observe anything the eye focuses light at a single spot on the retina due to the focusing of the lense, the aquious humour allowing a single point therefore a particle. Had the focus on the retina been similar to a double slit we would see light as a wave pattern. The limiting factor is the single spot focused on in the retina

Damn it!!!

the answer is in Pastor Chris message titled : Sound , Matter and Faith . pay attention .you will be amazed at the full explanation!

My head's hurt..

I saw a light particles in the mountains Too many

First off, we can't observe any of this with our eyes. Secondly the term observe is misleading because the detectors used to observe are physically interacting with the light thus changing the way it functions. When the detectors are turned off the light functions as before (no shit). Light, or electrons, etc. aren't changing because they see us observing them and are being tricky 2:58 but because the damn detection devices are interfering with their physical properties. Light always acts as a particle and a waive simultaneously until we interfere with our low tech detectors and then try to prescribe some mystical quality to the thing we are interfering with.

Please stop with the confusion about the fact that nature "knows" we are watching. I've seen many people share this error, and even one of my teachers at school in my early years!!! Even if this is a very peculiar phenomenon, the "transfer" from wave to particle (wave function collapse) has nothing to do with "consciousness". One fundamental thing to know is that you can't make ANY measurements on a system without perturbating the said system, and this applies to everything, but usually this is negligible. It just turns out that quantum system are at the most small/elementary scale, and their states are especially unstable, so any measurement will perturbate the system and make it act like a particle instead of a wave like the example shown here with young's windows. (that's also why most quantum systems are cooled down close to the absolute 0, because heat has the same perturbating effect on particles of matter (not on photons, which are a little different)). If not convinced, think 1min about that: if you want to measure a speed, what do you do? You can do like a radar, launch a particle which you know the exact momentum, let it reflect on your system, and study the momentum it lost -> you perturbated the system. For a car, it would go completely unnoticed, but for an electron, you are launching something of the same scale to collide with it, so it will obviously excite it and make a noticeable perturbation. More difficult now: you just want to see the particle, what do you do? You put a captor or your eye to see, but actually light enters the captor/eye and is stolen from the system -> you perturbated it, and everytime you will reopen your eye/captor, the system will be perturbated again and you will change what was happening, because you constantly steal particles of light. In fact, what is really strange here isn't about the measurement having a magical impact, because yes, it has. What is strange is the nature of particles to naturally be in a superposition of many states at the same time (and they can interact, acting as what we call a wave); and, even weirder, get to chose only one of them when perturbated (particle).

It is very simple, this is because its assessment is incorrect, there is no type of atomic or subatomic particles, it is only energy that transmutes its essence from total empty rest to the universe of matter through its own vibration, there is no matter in it. Absolutely, for the same reason photons are not particles of light, greetings to you for going deeper as necessary.

We know nothing Johns Snows 😃

I see light everyday, ask me if u have any doubt about it 😊

Not a particle. Only wave.

It's neither. It's a quantum field. Folks, you need to stop the childish false dichotomy fallacies.

Electricity and particles were already well known to the Romans and Hellenics people. They didn't do anything with it, not like we do at the moment. Mostly sign from the gods. Later, they researched it extensively. They knew that lightning was a danger to their ships (first weather forecast). also used lightning to navigate (first advanced sea navigation), for example.. Quantum mechanics was also known to both the ancient Greeks and Romans

Very easy. Light is not a wave nor a particle. If someone had thought of questioning Young's childish interpretation of light behaving like stupid waves on a pond, by visualizing the space between the slits and the screen, we wouldn't have wasted more than 200 years on a lie. There are no waves nor any interference patterns between the slits and the screen. Light simply diffracts into discrete independent rays never interfering with each other. Block a few rays of light between the slits and the screen and it won't affect adjacent rays at all. Don't believe me? Try the experiment through a cloud chamber with a laser and double slits from 3B Scientific. Quantum mechanics is nothing more than a clever probabilistic mathematical framework with absolutely no bearing on reality. Superposition is not real.

GOD DID IT TO SHOW WHO HE IS. AND HIS WISDOM IS BEYOND OUR COMPRESSION!

What if light was alive prove it wrong

I think Light is neithe wave nor particle. Because it pass through glass.

There is no experiment to prove that light makes two strands of light when observed...such baloney...!!!

no

JOB 38: 19-24

Owh 1 min ago

1.5x speed

Now tell us what you can actually prove 😉

Repent and forsake sins Jesus is coming he is the son of god

OMG, this video is just a series of errors. ;-)