Re: Sensation in der Physik : Nimtz Experiment wird durch Theorie des komplexen Brechungsindex bestätigt.


<g.scholten@xxxxxx> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:b8e3580e-ca59-4d6a-bc0e-be53ec6c1545@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 18 Nov., 15:50, "Josef Matz" <josefm...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Greens functions do not "only use c", Greens functions use wave
equations.

Answer I use also wave equations derived from macroscopic index theory.
But
there is something different from c in. v(group) is in.

then calculate the Greens function from your wave equation. We can
continue discussion when you've done it.

Answer: Calculating Greens functions is not my theme

it should be, before you start talking about signals with finite time
duration.


because my argument was that is does not make sense to attach terms in
flux to terms in energy density. None of the things you said touch
this.

Answer: Of course it makes sense.
For example the two wave tunnelflux. it is needed to fulfil energy
conservation at each of the two surfaces of the double prism.

The tunnel flux is needed, not an attachment of tunnel flux to a
special term in energy density. Energy conservation is conservation of
total energy, not of a single term in an expression.

Answer: Ape

you wanna write this in you doctor thesis?


The energy
density you deriveie not the right one. One has to take into account
another
effect we have not spoken about.

what effect?

Answer: You have none so stop you ape

hardly anyone will accept such a doctor thesis.


because it makes no sense
to discuss iNimtz with someone that does not accept the fundamental of
energy conservation for evanescent waves.

I do accept the fundamental of energy conservation, but not your
formulas. That's a difference.

Answer: Thjen you have a theory without.

that's only your opinion. You already should have regnognized that I
do not agree with you in this regard.


So if you want to know how the photons come into the evanescent wave,

I already know.

Answer: I think i should know how yours come in or ?

pardon?


Answer: We are not turning words ok ? You also can say How comes the
Signal
into the wave
flowing along a prism.

You mean, in the picture of time-constant energy flux, assuming an
infinite tunnel width, the flux into the tunnel is zero, and now you
wonder how the flux can become non-zero when you put a second prism in
finite distance?
Even in the picture of time constant flux this can be explained
easily: in case of infinite tunnel width, you have an energy jam in
the tunnel. However, if you put a second prism in finite distance,
energy formerly caught in the tunnel can flow to the second prism,
causing the energy density in the tunnel to decrease. This results in
an energy flux from first prism to tunnel, to backfill the energy that
flows from tunnel to second prism. The energy from first prism, that
was formerly flowing along the border surface of the prism, is now
partially sidelined into the tunnel.

Answer: If you would think you would see that all that is complete
nonsense
you say.

no, if YOU would think (supposed thinking is one of your abilities),
you would see that you are talking total bull***.

Answer: You are not very polite.

haha, neither as you.


The energy density for these hopping fluxes must now be calculated
taking
into account that there is a true
longitudinal wave component acting in additin to the standard formula.
Since
the longitudinal component
changes the energy flux formula, the correct calculation shows. That the
energy density is zero.

so, formerly you said, only the interference term of E and E' in
energdy density is zero, and now, suddenly, you say that total energy
density is zero because of longitudinal waves? What comes next?

Answer: Right. I wanted to see if you accept the energy formulas.

you didn't give me any.


Excuse me

no, I do not excuse.


that i let calculate you things.

you did not let me calculate things.


Now you have the mixed wave flux or tunnelflux formula. It is the
resultant
energy flux through the prism.

I think now I understand the meaning of the wave E'. It is NOT a
reflected wave as you frequently are telling. Its origin can be
understood best using the picture of oscillating flux: in each period,
in the one half period the energy flows into the tunnel, and flows
back completely in the other half period, as long as tunnel width is
infinite. However, with a second prism in finite distance, some of the
in-flowing energy arrives at the second prism and does not flow back
any more. This result in a term E' in electric field, that realizes a
partial destructive interference in the energy flux back to first
prism. So, in sum, there remains a non-zero flux in tunnel direction.
Of course, this term E' and its effect is kept when we switch to your
picture of time-constant flux.

Answer: No E´is the reflected wave. The photons hop through the gap and
are
reflected.

this is what you wanna derive. You cannot presume it then.
And if one assumes E' stands for reflected photons, this would mean
that reflected photons are responsible for the effect that there are
photons hopping through the tunnel at all. Little strange, don't you
think?


So, you're right when you say that E' is it what makes flux being non-
zero. However, this does not mean that you can identify the mixed E-E'
term in flux with a mixed term in energy density and say this would be
the tunnel energy density. Tunnel flux and tunnel density are always
the total quantities. For tunnel flux, all terms exepct the mixed ones
are zero, so total flux is equal to mixed term. But this does not mean
that there's a general rule that for any quantity the tunnel quantity
is given by mixed term.

Answer: Yes that can be done.

if that's all that you wanna write in you doctor thesis, you can be
sure this will not be accepted.


It has meaning: You need it for energy conservation. So to the last it
is
grown up by hopping processes only.
Therefore you must take into account the longitudinal field components
acting there. Therefore the true
energy density is zero. Therefore the group velocity is infinte.

your argumentation is wrong: you presume the tunnel flux is a hopping
process with infinite velocity (by claiming "So to the last it is
grown up by hopping processes only"), and from that you conclude that
energy density is zero und group velocity is infinite. So you conclude
infinite velocity from infinite velocity. That's what they call
tautology.

Answer: I can calculate it and it can be measured.

I was talking about your argumentation:

It has meaning: You need it for energy conservation. So to the last it
is
grown up by hopping processes only.
Therefore you must take into account the longitudinal field components
acting there. Therefore the true
energy density is zero. Therefore the group velocity is infinte.

There's neither any calculation nor measurement in it.
And I don't believe there's a measurement that tunnel energy density
is zero.


it is k1`= k1 ; k2`= - k2 thats the reflected.

where k2 is the imaginary component in tunneling direction. As k2' = -
k2, the reflected wave E' propagates in opposite direction to the wave
E.

Answer: No it does not.

why not?

Because thats the right one. This follows from metal optics. Normal
reflection wave ok ?

a typical property of reflected wave is that their component
perpendicular to reflection surface (k2 in this case) is turned to
opposite direction.


.