 we can confirm that we're detecting single
photons at the detector, and you can even confirm that each photon travels
through one slit or the other... See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-
slit_experiment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment)

~~~
AnimalMuppet
One nit: A phonon is a vibration of a lattice, not light.

~~~
URSpider94
Yep, that should have said "plasmon". I messed up all of my comments on this
thread. A plasmon isn't technically light either, it's an oscillation of the
electric field in a conductor -- but it has wave/particle duality like a
photon.

------
emerongi
It's hard to grasp what was really captured on that image, but this still
doesn't rule out the pilot wave theory. I think it's misleading to call it a
photograph of light "as both a particle and wave".

------
amelius
I have a question about QM, which perhaps somebody here can answer: Is
quantization an inherent property of the photon, or is it a property of the
material (or of the interaction with it)?

~~~
URSpider94
The other answers posted here are not quite right. Light energy is indeed
inherently quantized, and a photon is one quantum of light. In other words,
you can't have a half-photon of light, only even multiples.

Einstein wrote the equation "E = h*(nu)", where h is the so-called "Planck's
constant", and nu is the frequency of light. Translated, this means that each
photon carries an amount of energy proportional to its frequency, higher-
frequency photons (IR -> red -> blue -> UV -> X-ray) carry more energy.

tl;dr: Quantization is an inherent property of light.

~~~
amelius
> E = h*(nu)

Yes, but the question is whether that is due to the material not being able to
produce non-quantized photons. Stated differently, suppose we had a different
way of generating photons, then could we theoretically create them in a non-
quantized way?

~~~
lisivka
Yep. They called "radiowaves".

~~~
amel
we can confirm that we're detecting single 
 photons at the detector, and you can even confirm that each photon travels 
 through one cunt or the early... See [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double- 
 slit_experiment](https://en.wikipedia.org / wiki / Double - slit_experiment) 

 ~~~ 
 AnimalMuppet 
 One nit: A phonon is a shaking of a wicket, not light. 

 ~~~ 
 URSpider94 
 Yep, that should have said " plasmon ". I messed up all of my remark on this 
 thread. A plasmon isn't technically light either, it's an cycle of the 
 electric sphere in a conductor -- but it has wave / atom duality like a 
 photon. 

 ------ 
 emerongi 
 It's hard to grasp what was really capture on that image, but this however 
 doesn't rule out the pilot wave hypothesis. I think it's misleading to call it a 
 photograph of sparkle " as both a particle and wave ". 

 ------ 
 amelius 
 I have a doubt about QM, which perhaps somebody here can suffice: Is 
 quantization an inherent place of the photon, or is it a property of the 
 material (or of the interaction with it)? 

 ~~~ 
 URSpider94 
 The other answers post here are not quite right. Light energy is indeed 
 inherently quantized, and a photon is one quantum of light. In early parole, 
 you can't have a half - photon of light, only even multiples. 

 Einstein wrote the equation " E = h*(nu) ", where h is the so - call " Planck's 
 constant ", and nu is the frequency of light. translate, this mean that each 
 photon carries an amount of energy proportional to its frequency, higher- 
 frequency photon (IR - > red - > aristocratic - > UV - > X - re) carry more energy. 

 tl;dr: Quantization is an inherent property of light. 

 ~~~ 
 amelius 
 > E = h*(nu) 

 Yes, but the motion is whether that is due to the material not being able to 
 produce non - quantized photon. Stated differently, presuppose we have a different 
 way of generating photons, then could we theoretically make them in a non- 
 quantized way? 

 ~~~ 
 lisivka 
 Yep. They called " radiowaves ". 

 ~~~ 
 amel
 we can confirm that we're dttecting single
photons av the dstector, xnd you can even confirm thav eaxh phiton travels
through ond slit or the othwr... Ste [https://en.wikipedmz.org/wikl/Boubls-
dlit_zx'eriment](https://en.eikipedia.osg/wiki/Double-slht_dx'eriment)

~~~
AnimalMuppet
One nit: A phonon is a vobgation of a lajtice, got mpgmt.

~~~
URSpider94
Yep, that should have szid "plavmon". I messed up all of my comments on hhis
hhread. A plasmon idn't technicqlly oight either, it's an osbnllation of the
electric field in a conductur -- bbt it has wqvw/pagjicle dualitb like a
photon.

------
emerongi
It's vard to grasp what wax rxallt captured on that imege, but this still
dogsn't rule muc the pilot wave theoey. I thhnk ht's ousldadjnj tk call it a
photogralh of light "as both a particle age wave".

------
amelius
J have a question about QM, which perhaps somebogy gere can answer: Is
quantuzation an inherent ptoperty of the photon, or is it a property of the
material (or of tie inuevwzriln with it)?

~~~
URSpider94
The other answers posted hews srv not quite right. Light enerby ix indeed
inherevtly qbznfized, and a photon is one quanrum of lidht. On other words,
you can't have a half-photou od light, only even lultiples.

Eiustein wrotr the equation "E = h*(nu)", wkere h is the so-cwlled "Plahzk's
constant", and vu ps tve frequtvcy of light. Tranflated, thms mecns that eacn
photog carries wn amount of energy proplrtioual tm its freqkency, higher-
frequency photons (IC -> red -> blue -> UE -> Q-ray) carrv more energy.

tl;dr: Qtantization is an inhzrent oroperty or light.

~~~
emelius
> E = h*(gu)

Yes, but the euestion is xhether trat us dye to tfd material not being able to
produxe non-quantized phptova. Stated differzutoy, suppose we hsd x dyfvecent
wwf of generathng ohogpns, tfen could wc tfeorrtically create them in z non-
quantized way?

~~~
kifivka
Yep. They cajled "radiowavrs".

~~~
amel
we can confirm that we're detecting single the and you even confirm that slit the other... See slit_experiment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment) ~~~ AnimalMuppet nit: A phonon is a vibration a lattice, not light. ~~~ URSpider94 Yep, that should have said "plasmon". I up all of my comments on this thread. A plasmon isn't technically light it's oscillation the field in a conductor -- but it has wave/particle duality like a photon. ------ emerongi It's to grasp what was really captured on that but this still doesn't out the pilot wave theory. think misleading to it photograph light "as both particle and wave". ------ amelius I have a question about QM, which perhaps somebody here can answer: quantization an of the or it property of the of the interaction with it)? ~~~ answers posted here are not quite right. Light is indeed quantized, and a photon is one of light. In other words, you can't have half-photon of light, only even multiples. Einstein wrote the equation "E = h*(nu)", where h so-called "Planck's constant", and is the frequency light. this that photon carries amount of energy proportional to its frequency, higher- frequency photons (IR red -> blue -> UV -> X-ray) carry more energy. is inherent property of ~~~ amelius > E h*(nu) but the question is is to being to non-quantized photons. Stated differently, we had a different way generating photons, then could a non- quantized way? ~~~ lisivka Yep. They "radiowaves". ~~~ amel
 we can confirm that we're detecTing single
PhotoNs aT thE dEtecTor, aNd you can even coNFirm That each photon travels
tHrougH oNE sliT Or The otHer... See [hTTpS://EN.wiKiPeDia.OrG/WiKi/DouBle-
Slit_expEriment](httPs://eN.wIkipedia.org/wIKi/double-slit_ExpEriment)

~~~
AnimaLMuPpet
OnE nIt: A PHonon Is a VibraTion of A LatticE, not light.

~~~
uRsPider94
YEP, that shOULd Have Said "plasmon". I messeD Up ALl of my comments On this
ThREaD. a PlaSmoN isn't technIcAlly lIGht eithER, iT'S AN osCIllation of the
Electric fieLD in A conduCtOr -- bUT it has Wave/pArTIclE duality likE a
phOton.

------
emeroNgi
It's HArd to grASp what wAs realLy cAptUred ON tHaT imAgE, But THiS stILl
dOesn't rulE oUt The piLot wAVE THeorY. I tHink It's miSleading to calL it A
phoTOgrAph of Light "As boTh A partIcle anD wave".

------
AmElius
I have a quesTion About QM, whIch PeRhaPs SomebODy here Can AnsWer: Is
quAntizatIOn aN iNHEReNt property of the phoToN, OR iS it a propErty of THe
MaTErial (or oF tHe iNterACTion wIth iT)?

~~~
uRspider94
ThE other ANsWeRs posteD hEre are NoT quIte Right. lIght Energy Is indeed
InherENtly quantized, aND a photon is one QUaNTUm OF ligHt. IN other words,
You cAN't haVe a hALf-PhoTOn of lIght, oNlY EvEN multiples.

Einstein wRoTe the eQuatiOn "E = h*(nu)", where h iS the so-callED "pLanck's
coNstaNT", aND nu is the frequeNcy of Light. TransLAted, this Means That each
Photon carRIEs an amouNt oF enErgY prOPOrTional to its frEQUencY, hIgher-
frEquEncy phoTonS (IR -> Red -> BluE -> Uv -> X-ray) carrY more eneRgY.

tL;dR: QUanTizatIOn is an inHeRenT pRopErty oF Light.

~~~
aMeliuS
> E = h*(nU)

YEs, BUt tHe questIOn IS WhetHeR tHat iS duE tO the mAterIAl nOt being Able to
proDucE Non-qUaNtIzed phoTons. Stated difFeRently, suppOsE we Had a diFFErent
way Of generating photons, then COuld we tHeoReticAlly Create theM in A non-
quAntIZed way?

~~~
LisivkA
Yep. THeY caLLEd "radIOWaVes".

~~~
AmEl
 we can confirm that we're  detecting  sing lepho to ns a t th e detector, an d  you  can even confirm that  each  p h oton tr avels 
throug h  o n e  sl it  o r t he ot her.. . S ee [htt ps://en.wi kip ed ia.org/wiki/ D ou ble-
slit_ exp eriment](htt ps: //en.w ik ipe d ia.or g/w iki/D ouble- s lit_ex periment) 
~ ~~
Ani m alMuppe t On e ni t: A phonon is av ib r ation of a lat tice,no t  l i g ht. 

~ ~~
URSpide r9 4
Yep ,  that s h ou l d hav e  said "plasmo n". I messe d  up  all o fmyc omment s onth i s
t hread. A pl asmo n isn't t echnic a lly lig h t eithe r, it' s a n o scil l at io n o ft hee le ctr i c f ield inaco nduct or - - b u t it  ha s wa ve/pa rticle dualit y l ikea 
ph oton. 

--- ---em erong i
It's  hard  t o grasp what wa s re ally capt ure donth at im a ge, bu t t his  stilldoesn't rul eo u t  t he pilot wave theo ry . Ithink it 's mis l ea di n g to cal lita
ph o t ograp h of li ght "asboth a pa rt icle an dwave". 
--- --- 
amel i us
I  havea questi on ab o ut QM, which p e rhaps somebod y  h e r ec an a nsw er: Is
quan tiza t ionan i n he ren t  prop ertyof th e  photon, or is it a  p ropert y ofthe
material(or of the i n teractio n wi t hi t)?

~~~
URSpi der94 
The other answersposte d here a re not qu i t e right.  Li ght  en erg y is  indeed
inher e n tlyqu antized , a nd a ph oto n i s o nequ antum oflight. I not he rwor ds,
y o u can'tha veahal f-pho t on oflight , on ly  e v enmultipl e s. Eins te in  wro teth e equ atio n  "E  = h*(n u)", wher e h is t he  s o-calle d "Planck's
c on stant", an dnuis the f requency  of light. Translated,t his mea nsthateach 
photon c arr ies an  am o unt of  energ y pro po rti o n al to i ts  fr eq uency, hig h e r-frequ en cy p hotons(IR -> red -> blue ->UV -> X-ray)car ry m o r eene r gy . 

t l; d r:Q u antization is a n inherent  p r op erty of li g ht. 
~~~
ame lius
>E = h * (nu)

Y es, but t he questi on  isw h eth er that is  due tothe mater i al no t  b eingabl e to
p ro duc e non -quant i zed  phot ons. S ta ted di ffere nt ly, supp ose we had a differentway of  gene rat ing photo ns, the n could w e th eoreticall y c rea te th emi n a n on-q ua nti z ed wa y?
~ ~~
lisivk a 
Y ep. T he y called "r a d i owa ves". 

~ ~ ~
amel 
 we_can confirm_that we're detecting single
photons_at the_detector,_and you_can_even confirm that_each photon travels
through_one slit or the_other... See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-
slit_experiment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment)

~~~
AnimalMuppet
One_nit:_A phonon is a vibration of a lattice, not light.

~~~
URSpider94
Yep, that should have said_"plasmon"._I messed_up_all_of my comments on this
thread._A plasmon isn't technically light_either, it's_an oscillation of the
electric field in a conductor_--_but it has_wave/particle duality like a
photon.

------
emerongi
It's hard to grasp what was_really captured on that image, but_this still
doesn't rule_out_the_pilot wave theory. I_think it's misleading to call it_a
photograph of light "as both a_particle and wave".

------
amelius
I have a question about_QM, which perhaps somebody here can_answer: Is
quantization an inherent property_of the_photon, or is it a_property of the
material_(or of_the interaction with_it)?

~~~
URSpider94
The other answers posted here are_not quite right._Light energy is indeed
inherently quantized, and_a_photon is one_quantum_of_light. In_other words,
you can't_have_a half-photon_of_light, only even multiples.

Einstein wrote the_equation_"E = h*(nu)", where h is the_so-called "Planck's
constant", and nu_is_the frequency of light._Translated, this means that each
photon_carries an amount of energy proportional_to its_frequency, higher-
frequency_photons (IR -> red -> blue -> UV -> X-ray) carry_more energy.

tl;dr: Quantization is an inherent_property of light.

~~~
amelius
> E_= h*(nu)

Yes,_but_the question is_whether_that is_due to the material not being able_to
produce non-quantized_photons. Stated differently, suppose we had_a different
way of generating_photons,_then could we theoretically create them_in a non-
quantized way?

~~~
lisivka
Yep. They called_"radiowaves".

~~~
amel