Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Double-Slit Experiment with individual electrons represents the central mystery of quantum mechanics and was voted by readers of Physics World as the most beautiful experiment in physics. In our trigonometric model we have divided the Young-Feynman double-slit interferometer into two zones: Aristotelian mixing chamber (the space between the entrance slit S0 and above the double-slit barrier with slits S1 and S2 where particles have been reflected (Euclid) and/or randomly deviated – parenklisis of Epicurus) and Plato’s projection chamber (the space below the double-slit barrier and above the projection screen). Aristotelian mixing chamber represents the classical hidden variable: individual particles have been reflected and/or randomly deviated in this zone and later pass through the double-slit barrier in such a way that they create probability distributions of single particles described by the very well known trigonometric relations. The double-slit barrier serves as a “self-organizing filter” for reflected and/or deviated individual particles and creates an order in the population densities among individual particles. For the experimental evaluation of this trigonometric model we propose to insert an internal and external “sfumato mirrors” for the quantitative manipulation of probability distributions of individual particles. The concept “sfumato” was inspired by the Old Master Leonardo da Vinci (see his picture Mona Lisa) (“sfumato” means “smoke”). Sfumato mirrors represent the classical observable variable and their influence on the resulting probability densities of individual particles can be trigonometrically described. Sfumato mirrors must not absorb any particles. In another experimental modification we can insert below one slit of the double-slit barrier an “absorption chiaroscuro mask” to fully remove those penetrating particles from the system and thus manipulate with the probability distribution observed with one opened slit (“chiaroscuro” means “light-dark”). It could be of interest to observe the resulting probability distribution of individual particles registered on the projection screen from one opened slit S1 or S2. The absorption chiaroscuro mask must not reflect particles back to the Aristotelian mixing chamber or to the Plato´s projection chamber. The results of these experiments will decide if we are just going up in a blind alley”.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".