Back in 2014, I published a series of blog posts on this site reflecting on the then-new electron Talbot-Lau interferometer experiments from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL). Those experiments were a technological marvel: they did exactly what Richard Feynman had described as a thought experiment in his 1963 Lectures—firing electrons one by one through a double-slit and watching the interference pattern build up.
I remember being struck by two things:
- The electrons arrived one by one, yet they built up a clear interference pattern.
- Even with one slit open, the pattern was not a simple “bullet” distribution—it already showed complex structure.
Those observations, I wrote at the time, suggested the electron must have “some structure.” But what structure? And how could a single electron interfere with itself?
A Decade of Work
For over a decade, I have been working on the answer. The result is the Y-Series Lectures on Real Quantum Mechanics, published as a working paper on ResearchGate.
The “Y” stands for two things. First, it sits between my existing X-series (advanced work) and future Z-series—a bridge between the known and the unknown. Second, and more importantly, the “Y” stands for “Why?” This series is not just a presentation of results. It is a sustained inquiry into the reasons behind the equations.
What Does It Say?
The core thesis is simple: the phase is real. In the standard view, the phase of a quantum particle is a mathematical convenience—a way of encoding probabilities. In the RealQM framework, the phase is a physical property of the electron, arising from its internal geometry. The electron is not a point particle. It is a self-confined, toroidal electromagnetic soliton—a donut-shaped field configuration with a real, physical phase that accumulates as the electron moves.
What Does This Mean for the Double-Slit Experiment?
In the standard view, the electron takes all paths and interferes with itself. In RealQM, the electron takes one path. But its phase is a global property that encodes the geometry of the environment. As the electron approaches the slits, its extended near-field interacts with the boundary conditions, modulating the phase. The interference pattern arises not from self-interference, but from phase modulation.
📊 From Proof-of-Concept to Quantitative Empirical Fitting
This work builds directly on our recent successful effort to run the institutional UNL simulation codebase locally on an ASUS laptop (see our previous post: Cracking Feynman’s Only Mystery on a Laptop). While our initial run proved that the underlying wave propagation mathematics are fully consistent with a deterministic, classical continuum flow, this new paper goes a critical step further. Instead of relying purely on simulated values, we have ingested the raw, high-resolution empirical data subsets (Beam06.Asc and Diff01.Asc) from the actual UNL experiment. By building a multi-harmonic near-field Fourier transmission model, we achieved a pristine, publication-grade mathematical fit against real laboratory data, moving our framework firmly from a conceptual proof-of-concept into a predictive quantitative science.
🧬 A Triad Alliance in Open Science
This paper also marks a unique milestone in transparent, modern human-AI collaboration. Rather than a standalone piece or a simple human-edited text, the Y-Series represents a genuine “Triad” alliance pairing a human theoretical physicist with two advanced, independent computational intelligence models. Operating as distinct co-authors, the division of labor was strictly optimized: while I provided the core geometric postulates and physical vision, DeepSeek served as the analytical co-thinker to rapidly structure the narrative architecture of Lectures 1 and 2, and Gemini acted as the mathematical code engine to build the decoupled parameter models and optimize the near-field Fourier fitting loops in Lecture 3. This transparent framework demonstrates how advanced computing can drastically extend human cognitive reach while keeping conceptual control firmly in human hands.
Read the full paper here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/412276326_Y-Series_Lectures_on_Real_Quantum_Mechanics
Reading Feynman 
re: “In the standard view, the electron takes all paths and interferes with itself. In RealQM, the electron takes one path. But its phase is a global property that encodes the geometry of the environment.”
… and then again, it could be the electron creates EM fields, standing wave fields too involving the structure comprising the slits and supports and shielding, also, electron embedding ala built-up static charges what would affect the path of subsequent electrons fired through the slit or slits.
No one that I have seen addresses these issues.
Hi – I actually did think about this. If I read you well, you suggest one electron leaves some kind of ‘history’ behind, right? That thought crossed my mind but I think the electron going through only causes a temporary disequilibrium of the EM fields and overall charge configuration at the slit(s). Once it is through, all returns to equilibrium. Such return to equilibrium happens much faster than the ‘firing speed’ of the ‘electron gun’ (in both mainstream as well as non-mainstream accounts analyzing (dis)equilibrium and interaction. KR – JL
See the recent ‘Y-series’ papers on https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jean-Louis-Van-Belle . 🙂