- last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT
Posted by: mikexvx
nice try, but you are wrong.
dude you should be taking meds for your dementia so you won't talk to yourself
the halo-to-marathon theory, or rather, obviously self-intuitive fact and truth goes as follows:
the portal that colapsed on the UNSC Mendicant Bias, the ship was torn in two but ABSOLUTELY NOT sent into any kind of alternate universe crap. the master chief (MC henceforth) went into the cryo tube and bla bla so on and so forth until you see the ship falling toward some kind of planet looking object. this obviously cannot be onyx, but not because onyx "asploded" to quote phearmaker exactly. the sentinel type thingies aren't dead they just scattered off into space. read the book. so what happens is somehow MC's life is preserved until the 200 years afterwards in the marathon timeline and so the story continues. and so what of MC? he's there. i recomend you people go play through the marathon series on the "Total Carnage" difficulty. and actually, in the beginning of maraton, you see "somewhere in the heavens, they are waiting". this is a backward reference to the covenant reuniting and, once again, trying to annihilate the human race. all of phearmaker's info is 100% accurate with the exception of the alternate universe thing. I mean, it is totally possible, but bungie woudn't do that because of time constraints and well, only particles on a quantum level can coexist in two places at one time. don't believe me? read this:
"Christiaan Huygens understood the basic idea of how light propagates and how to predict its path through a physical apparatus. He understood a light source to emit a series of waves comparable to the way that water waves spread out from something like a bobber that is jiggled up and down as it floats on the water surface. He said that the way to predict where the next wave front will be found is to generate a series of concentric circles on a sufficiently large number of points on a known wave front and then draw a curve that will pass tangent to all the resulting circles out in front of the known wave front. The diagram given here shows what happens when a flat wave front is extended in this manner, and what happens when a curved wave front is extended in the same way. Augustin Fresnel (1788-1827) based his proof that the wave nature of light does not contradict the observed fact that light propagates in a straight line in homogeneous media on Huygens' work, and also based himself on Huygens' ideas to give a complete account of diffraction and interference phenomena known at his time.[3] See the article Huygens–Fresnel principle for more information.
Note the there are four gaps between crests hitting the screen -- places that will be darker in the resultant diffraction pattern visible to an observer
Note the there are four gaps between crests hitting the screen -- places that will be darker in the resultant diffraction pattern visible to an observer
The second drawing shows what happens when a flat wave front encounters a slit in a wall. Following the same principle elucidated above, it is clear that the new wave front will "bulge out" from the slit and light will be experienced as having diverged around the edges of the slit.
The third drawing shows the explanation for interference based on the classical idea of a single wave front that represents all the light energy emitted by a source at one moment. Since photons diverge beyond the barrier wall, the distance between parts of any pattern they form on the target wall increase as the distance they have to travel increases, a fact that is well known from everyday experience with things like automobile headlights whose beams are not parallel. But decreasing the distance between slits will also increase the distance between fringes. Increasing the wavelength will also increase the distance between fringes as long as the slits are wide enough to permit the passage of light of that wavelength. Slits that are very wide in comparison to the frequency of the photons involved (e.g., two ordinary windows in a single wall) will permit light to appear to go "straight through."
J is the distance between fringes. J = Dλ/B "D" = dist. S2 to F, λ = wavelength, B = dist. a to b
J is the distance between fringes. J = Dλ/B "D" = dist. S2 to F, λ = wavelength, B = dist. a to b [4]
When light came to be understood as the result of electrons falling from higher energy orbits to lower energy orbits, the light that is delivered to some surface in any short interval of time came to be understood as ordinarily representing the arrival of very many photons, each with its own wave front. In understanding what actually happens in the two-slit experiment it became important to find out what happens when photons are emitted one by one.[5] When it became possible to perform that experiment, it became apparent that a single photon has its own wave front that passes through both slits, and that the single photon will show up on the detector screen according to probability values. When a great number of photons are sent through the apparatus one by one and recorded on photographic film, the same interference pattern emerges that had been seen before when many photons were being emitted at the same time. The double-slit experiment was first performed by Taylor in 1909,[6] by reducing the level of incident light until on average only one photon was being transmitted at a time.[7]
[edit] Importance to physics
Sketch of the layout of a classical optical double-slit experiment Note that lasers are commonly used today and replace the incoherent source of light and the top pinhole.
Sketch of the layout of a classical optical double-slit experiment Note that lasers are commonly used today and replace the incoherent source of light and the top pinhole.
Although the double-slit experiment is now often referred to in the context of quantum mechanics, it is generally thought to have been first performed by the English scientist Thomas Young in the year 1801 in an attempt to resolve the question of whether light was composed of particles (Newton's "corpuscular" theory), or rather consisted of waves traveling through some ether, just as sound waves travel in air. The interference patterns observed in the experiment seemed to discredit the corpuscular theory, and the wave theory of light remained well accepted until the early 20th century, when evidence began to accumulate which seemed instead to confirm the particle theory of light.[8]
The double-slit experiment, and its variations, then became a classic Gedankenexperiment (thought experiment) for its clarity in expressing the central puzzles of quantum mechanics; although in this form the experiment was not actually performed with anything other than light until 1961, when Claus Jönsson of the University of Tübingen performed it with electrons[9][10], and not until 1974 in the form of "one electron at a time", in a laboratory at the University of Milan, by researchers led by Pier Giorgio Merli, of LAMEL-CNR Bologna.
The results of the 1974 experiment were published and even made into a short film, but did not receive wide attention. The experiment was repeated in 1989 by Tonomura et al at Hitachi in Japan. Their equipment was better, reflecting 15 years of advances in electronics and a dedicated development effort by the Hitachi team. Their methodology was more precise and elegant, and their results agreed with the results of Merli's team. Although Tonomura asserted that the Italian experiment had not detected electrons one at a time—a key to demonstrating the wave-particle paradox—single electron detection is clearly visible in the photos and film taken by Merli and his group.[11]
In September 2002, the double-slit experiment of Claus Jönsson was voted "the most beautiful experiment" by readers of Physics World.[12]
[edit] Importance to philosophy
Philosophy is concerned with the nature of ideas about the world (or worlds), how those ideas are grounded, and how to ferret out self-contradictions. The double-slit experiment is of great interest therefore, because it forces philosophers to reevaluate their ideas about such basic concepts as "particles",[13] "waves", "location", "movement from one place to another", etc.
In contrast to the way of conceptualizing the macroscopic world of everyday experience, attempting to describe the motion of a single photon is problematic. As Philipp Frank observes, investigating the motion of single particles through a single slit can obtain a description of the pattern of photon strikes on a target screen. However, "the pattern of fringes for two slits is not the superposition of the two patterns for single slits. Hence, there is no law of motion that would determine the trajectory of a single photon and allow us to derive the observed facts that occur when photons pass two slits."[14] Experience in the micro world of sub-atomic particles forces to reconceptualize some of the most commonplace ideas."