For the first time in science history the iconic double-slit experiment's startling results are explained. We posit. Real Science Radio hosts Bob and Fred Williams in their second program on this apparent breakthrough begin by laying out their outline for this and the next broadcast. - That beautiful equations could describe physics Einstein thought incomprehensible - Comprehending how such equations can describe physics is a key to the 2-slit results - Describe again and explain further the "Day-4 Double-Slit Explanation" - Further elucidate the How and Why of the 2-slit experiment - Propose experiments to test the day-4 double-slit explanation - Address any early challenges - Make D4DS predictions about photosynthesis and space cameras The double-slit experiment results are known for seeming physically impossible. To overcome that hurdle, see RSR's... - List of Things that are Not Physical, and - The Wave-Particle Duality is a Triality. RSR's observations in their rsr.org/physical and rsr.org/triality series also explain: - how quantum tunneling can occur - how the instantaneous decoherence of vastly separated entangled particles can occur - how to resolve what Einstein said was incomprehensible, about how our equations can describe physics - how a massive waveform can instantaneously collapse - how two specks of dust a universe apart can attract one another. With the How address by RSR's previous series, the Day-4 Double-Slit (D4DS) Explanation combines: - the size of a single photon's wave form - the distance of the closest and furthest visible stars, and - the purpose of God's work on Day Four of creation. From rsr.org/math#beautiful-equations: * Astounding and Unexpectedly Beautiful Equations: E = mc2. Exploring unexpected and even startling symmetry and patterns from the microscopic to the galactic scale, mathematicians often describe their work as an aesthetic pursuit of beauty, as Lacayo quotes Einstein that relativity was his "most beautiful discovery." i- Symmetry: E = mc2 - Electrons: (i∂ - m)ψ = 0 - Entropy: S = k log W - Propagation: I = P/(4π r2) - Fields: ∇∙B = 0 - Uncertainty: ∇ P ∇x ≥ ħ/2 - Thermodynamics: dS ≥ 0 - Radiation: E = hf - Waves: ψ(x, y, z, t) = a + ib a - Force: F=ma - And then there's even complex numbers, and the square root of negative one, which itself is a beautiful conundrum, which govern electric circuits and other areas of quantum mechanics! Notice: Live on YouTube, see Bob and Fred speak tomorrow, Sat., Aug. 14, at 1:30 p.m. Central Time from San Antonio, Texas about creationism at, of all places, an ex-Jehovah's Witnesses event. Just go to YouTube and search for: Witnesses Now for Christ, Southwest Conference. What forces obey the inverse square law? Light, gravity, electric fields, sound, radiation. Why say, "obey"? And what do we make of the beauty of Dirac's equation, (∂ + m) ψ = 0, describing how fast-moving electrons behave? He himself wrote in Scientific American in 1963, "It seems to be one of the fundamental features of nature that fundamental physical laws are described in terms of a mathematical theory of great beauty", and further, on a blackboard in Moscow, "A physical law must possess mathematical beauty." Consider that scientists enjoy the inverse square law  I = P/(4π r2), the beauty of Maxwell's field equations, and of Ludwig Boltzmann's formula for entropy, which is even engraved on his tombstone. And as math becomes increasingly purely theoretical, it seems to do an even better job at describing reality, as with the use of the square root of negative one, not only as in describing electrical circuits in the 1800s, but also today for describing quantum mechanics. Another Ludwig, von Mises, similarly wrote in Human Action, that contemporary philosophers "are entirely wrong in their endeavors to reject any kind of a priori knowledge and to characterize logic, mathematics and [economics] as empirical and experimental disciplines. ... Moreover, it is not experience but thin