Why Quantum Mechanics Is Not So Weird after All

[buzneg]

just stumbled on this,
http://www.csicop.org/si/2006-04/quantum-mechanics.html

[buzneg]

actually that's an interesting site, http://opensourceenergy.org/C16/OSEN%20Projects/default.aspx

though you all might know it already

[PaulLowrance]

I don't mean to sound sarcastic, but I predict the soon death of QM (as we know it). I plan on building an experiment that will prove or disprove sub-photon energies in the radio frequency band. It is truth we seek, correct?  I am conversing with one QM physicists that seems interested, who stated he would admit flaw in QM if my experiment succeeds and is replicated by peer-review. So far so good. Here's an outline of the experiment :

---
This is just a quick run, but we'll see if I made any errors when I meticulously go over the numbers -->

For now two significant digits will due.

Structure: Single dipole in free space.
Frequency: 1.0 GHz.
Dipole length: 0.14 m
Dipole wire diameter: 1.4 mm (15 AWG)
E-field at 0.2 meters away from dipole center: 1.2 uV / meter
Radiated energy, 1 sine wave: 6.6E-25 J

Photon:
Energy of a 1 GHz photon: E = hf = 6.6E-34 * 1 GHz = 6.6E-25 J

The E-field is 1.2 uV / meter. For now we'll just simplify this by applying a 0.14 receiving antenna for 1.2 uV * 0.14 = 170 nV. I could add a high impedance-receiving antenna in to NEC to accurately find the receiving voltage. Although 170 nV is close enough for now. That is doable! Roughly six months ago I was measuring 1 nV signals in the radiation belt Los Angeles, CA. Of course the frequency was much lower, but according a terrestrial noise graph the noise drastically drops with increase in frequency. For now this seems very easy.

Please note the above dipole was used merely as a signal source to quickly determine the E-field magnitude of one photon. The final version would consist of a smaller dipole to wavelength ratio. This applies to both transmitting and receiving antennas. Narrowing the dipole as close to a point source is highly advantageous. This narrows any field lag in the wire since a half wavelength dipole consists of an appreciably lengthy wave.
---

Regards,
Paul Lowrance

[Clarky]

I think there is only one problem with the duality of QM and that is we don't properly factor in our own conciousness during the observation.

Our perception is clearly causing the change in behaviour from particle to wave, what that should tell us is there are energies envolved in creating reality that are operating outside of our own physical perception, because we are clearly observing the same thing as our measuring equipment but in the event of our direct observation it shows there is an illusion of sorts.

So ultimately it's our viewpoint that defines the physicality of our reality.