Can you explain one of the greatest mysteries ever ?
- Thread starter Davros
- Start date
What's the largest particle type used that exhibits the behaviour? And what different 'slits' are being tried? Are they all physical, molecular barriers? And what projectile speeds exhibit the behaviour?
@ shifty
Regarding speed the fastest is obviously C with photons, dont know what the slowest speed is.
Slit width, different types of slit have been tried,(and even the left and right slits having different widths) obviously if they are too far apart the chance of the particle being able to hit either slit decreases but as the youtube video
I posted (homemade double sit experiment) where the slits are made by a guy with a pin you don't have to be super precise.
As for the largest object, The largest entities for which the double-slit experiment has been performed were molecules that each comprised 810 atoms (whose total mass was over 10,000 atomic mass units.
https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/physicists-smash-record-for-wave-particle-duality-462c39db8e7b
ps: I do know the speed of an electron in a crt is around 30 000 000 m/s or about 1/10 of the speed of light. If it would be similar in the experiment (when done with electrons) I don't know
Regarding speed the fastest is obviously C with photons, dont know what the slowest speed is.
Slit width, different types of slit have been tried,(and even the left and right slits having different widths) obviously if they are too far apart the chance of the particle being able to hit either slit decreases but as the youtube video
I posted (homemade double sit experiment) where the slits are made by a guy with a pin you don't have to be super precise.
As for the largest object, The largest entities for which the double-slit experiment has been performed were molecules that each comprised 810 atoms (whose total mass was over 10,000 atomic mass units.
https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/physicists-smash-record-for-wave-particle-duality-462c39db8e7b
ps: I do know the speed of an electron in a crt is around 30 000 000 m/s or about 1/10 of the speed of light. If it would be similar in the experiment (when done with electrons) I don't know
Last edited:
I'm not so sure.
I see the particle go through the left slit, me in an alt universe sees the particle go through the right slit
shouldn't that mean I see the particle go through the left slit and act as a particle and alt me see the particle go through the right slit and act as a particle.
Two independent experiments ?
But I'm seeing what appears to be my particle interfering with the particle from the alt universe creating the interference pattern how the hell is that happening.
Also there must be another universe or more where I am using a detector on the slits so why doesn't that affect my experiment ?
Also have these universes always existed or are they created by a choice ?
By throwing a dice do i create 6 different universes, if I do the euromillions lottery (76,275,360 combinations) Do I create 76,275,360 universes ?
Last edited:
The particle went through both slits in different universes. The probability of the particle having gone through either slit creates the interference pattern: say in universe A the particle went through the left slit, and in universe B the particle went through the right slit.
You are neither in universe A or universe B, you are in universe C where the particle hits the detector. The interference pattern is created by the probability of particle having gone through either slit (both A and B are consistent pasts of C).
IMO, there is no single known past with multiple unknown futures -> the events you observe in the present depends on the probability of all possible pasts that are consistent with the present state of the universe. In other words, anything that can happen does happen in a future universe, but anything that could have happened did happen in a past universe, the present you perceive being a random one at any time, thus creating weird things like this.
If you throw a dice to pick euromillions lottery results, there is a universe in which you will win, assuming the results of the dice throwing is a truly random event (but the odds of finding yourself in that universe remains 76,275,360 to 1, so most versions of you will lose, although you can still feel happy knowing that a version of you did win).
You are neither in universe A or universe B, you are in universe C where the particle hits the detector. The interference pattern is created by the probability of particle having gone through either slit (both A and B are consistent pasts of C).
IMO, there is no single known past with multiple unknown futures -> the events you observe in the present depends on the probability of all possible pasts that are consistent with the present state of the universe. In other words, anything that can happen does happen in a future universe, but anything that could have happened did happen in a past universe, the present you perceive being a random one at any time, thus creating weird things like this.
If you throw a dice to pick euromillions lottery results, there is a universe in which you will win, assuming the results of the dice throwing is a truly random event (but the odds of finding yourself in that universe remains 76,275,360 to 1, so most versions of you will lose, although you can still feel happy knowing that a version of you did win).
I am also in a universe where a particle did go through a slit, otherwise I'd get an interference pattern when firing no particles.
This. This part of the experiment to me proves that there is an interaction between the "detector" and what is going on; And I assume this interaction is what can't be explained, which is a bit odd, because essentially, finding the answer to how that interference changes the pattern is everything in solving this question. Shouldn't this theroetically be easy to figure out? As you say, to see something you have to hit it with light. Maybe the assumption is that "seeing" is entirely a passive process (only receiving), when in fact there is something that bounces back and forward (a bit like sonar)?
Are you sure about that? 'Seeing' is purely a receiving action. Isn't it? Your eyes collect the light that is coming to them. They don't send anything. Same for a detector.
The detector has to sample a physical item or effect. In the case of seeing, you are detecting photons emitted/reflected from the object. In the case of detecting a photon, once you detect it with your eyes it ceases to exist! You'd have to observe its presence in the world and if it's not exerting a detectable presence, you'd have to apply something to it that it can affect that you can detect. If you create an electromagnetic field or whatever, you are influencing the particle.
However, this is a moot as the experiment has been performed with different particles, different detectors (presumably), and importantly, multi-atomic particles of significant size. Consistent behaviour in such variety is highly suggestive that the measuring itself is not changing the outcome.
If I were in a position to design experiments to explore this, I'd look at changing the nature of the 'slits' (which are actually massively open chasms with long, thick walls in atomic terms) and more importantly, exploring the particle and speed threshold for this behaviour. It isn't going to scale up to shooting table-tennis balls through a 2m hole at 50 mph and seeing the same wave-like pattern!
However, this is a moot as the experiment has been performed with different particles, different detectors (presumably), and importantly, multi-atomic particles of significant size. Consistent behaviour in such variety is highly suggestive that the measuring itself is not changing the outcome.
If I were in a position to design experiments to explore this, I'd look at changing the nature of the 'slits' (which are actually massively open chasms with long, thick walls in atomic terms) and more importantly, exploring the particle and speed threshold for this behaviour. It isn't going to scale up to shooting table-tennis balls through a 2m hole at 50 mph and seeing the same wave-like pattern!
How could you possibly see something which has not been hit by an absolute massive (not literally, just figuratively) thing like a photon, the one that then pokes into your eyes. Do you play billard?
That photon is not coming from your eyes! And that photon will hit that object whether I'm there to see it or not.How could you possibly see something which has not been hit by an absolute massive (not literally, just figuratively) thing like a photon, the one that then pokes into your eyes. Do you play billard?
The photon is not there when you don't have the sensor emitting photon for the sake of measuring. You could say they point a lamp on the object to see what's going on, in that particular test. The logic doesn't change if you use fields to measure or some thing else. You always "hit" the observed object with something to get a response back. Otherwise there is no response. That is well known and I think pretty clear.
The test itself is not as black and white as it seems, even when you use a lamp or only single particles, some particle are hit by photons and some are not, some are measured some are not, and they each explose their own results which then get mixed together. Making the experiment in a half-lit room and in an isolated black test-chamber is not giving the same results.
Some people think Quantum Mechanics isn't really relevant to everyday life, but its currently being used in the design of beds
What about protection from asphyxia?
What I ment is "seeing" in the context of the detector. Simple logic tells us that the detector being there and activated changes something in the environment and affects the result in that the behaviour is different. The relevant question is; what is changing? Perhaps our science hasn't progressed far enough to understand or see that yet. But, my guess is, if you understand that, you might understand why the atoms are behaving different and achieve that "pattern" through both slits.
It's a fun experiment, to the point that it probably can only be answered by scientist, not by pure logic/common-sense.
My very humble guess is that there's probably some element of bouncing going on, in that when it hits the end, it is bounces back and forth. If I was conducting the experiment, I'd widen the gap between the slits to see if the pattern changes (does the wavelength become longer?) or not. If it does, then the gap between the two slits is paramount to the pattern, which might confirm that there is some bouncing going on. Or the environment/room (pressure?) is different due to the slits.
I'm really no expert here, I know enough about physics to get around but my knowledge is quite limited.
But for the sake of argument, what would happen if a person or a detector was still in the room, but turned the other way so as not to actually observe the event? The observer would still emit an electromagnetic field - which some say could be what influences the particles - but what would that result be?
If this is not actually about observing and more about 'being in the room', then that's a different argument.
I remain convinced that seeing is a completely passive activity, but as I said I'm no noble prize here.
But for the sake of argument, what would happen if a person or a detector was still in the room, but turned the other way so as not to actually observe the event? The observer would still emit an electromagnetic field - which some say could be what influences the particles - but what would that result be?
If this is not actually about observing and more about 'being in the room', then that's a different argument.
I remain convinced that seeing is a completely passive activity, but as I said I'm no noble prize here.
After thinking sometime about this, I think there are a few things to remember:
a) everyone can conduct the same experiment at home with the exact same pattern emerging, namely with light (in the video first example)
b) Shooting atoms, as in the rest of the experiment, results in the same pattern, unless there is a detector observing either slit.
Point A from what I understand is standard wavelength behaviour. Point B (shooting with atoms) is where the mystery lies, yes? And the mystery is directly with how the "detector" influences either the pattern emerging or not. So I therefore conclude that the detector plays a significant role in how the atoms behave. This is a pretty logical conclusion it seems. The reason for shooting atoms in the first place is because the experiment is to simulate a single element passing through the slit and following it to see where it hits - and then to figure out how the rest of the individual atoms are projected and why their path is slightly different and results in the pattern (case in point in the video; How does a single atom know it's part of the bigger picture?).
In Point A, it is said that the pattern emerges because light that passes through reflects, bounces and cancels each other out. Is this not the same with atoms? (Answer: that the same applies on some level is somewhat logical or else the same pattern wouldn't emerge). Lots of logical conclusions here, so I'm not sure what the main mystery is. Can anyone with a science background enlighten us?
a) everyone can conduct the same experiment at home with the exact same pattern emerging, namely with light (in the video first example)
b) Shooting atoms, as in the rest of the experiment, results in the same pattern, unless there is a detector observing either slit.
Point A from what I understand is standard wavelength behaviour. Point B (shooting with atoms) is where the mystery lies, yes? And the mystery is directly with how the "detector" influences either the pattern emerging or not. So I therefore conclude that the detector plays a significant role in how the atoms behave. This is a pretty logical conclusion it seems. The reason for shooting atoms in the first place is because the experiment is to simulate a single element passing through the slit and following it to see where it hits - and then to figure out how the rest of the individual atoms are projected and why their path is slightly different and results in the pattern (case in point in the video; How does a single atom know it's part of the bigger picture?).
In Point A, it is said that the pattern emerges because light that passes through reflects, bounces and cancels each other out. Is this not the same with atoms? (Answer: that the same applies on some level is somewhat logical or else the same pattern wouldn't emerge). Lots of logical conclusions here, so I'm not sure what the main mystery is. Can anyone with a science background enlighten us?
Not really needed, yes you may die but the good news is you will also be alive at exactly the same time.
A passive background EM field isn't going to affect the results. I was suggesting shooting something through an EM field to measure it, but of course you're then shooting photons at the particle. Some insight into what the detector is actually doing would be helpful!
Only because there's no Nobel Prize for Gorgeousness.
That's not the experiment.
There are two issues. 1) Why does a particle behave like a wave and create the interference pattern? 2) Why does it stop behaving like a wave when the detector is engaged?
Quantum physics theories suggest that events only 'happen' when observed, and before they are observed they are a collection of probabilities (as I understand it, although I'm no expert). One of the theories to this experiment is that the particle, when launched, exists as a set of probable trajectories, and these are resolved when the particle is detected. If the particle isn't detected, the probabilities interact as if a wave, and the detection then resolves the trajectory at the point of impact on the surface, after the wave interaction. Or some-such. The principle being that the results are extremely alien to conventional human-level physics and cause-and-effect interactions.
Nope. It's not about particles, but waves. Light behaves as both. We know absolutely that there is a particle, a photon, with mass, that moves. But we also know this particle behaves as a wave, not as a particle.
To me, the most natural explanation is that there is a 'field' (n dimensional aspect, possibly outside the conventional barriers of space-time and yet with a measurable affect on space at least) defining the path of the photon, and this field acts similar to water. It will have high and low pressure areas creating waves, and photons will follow the paths of these pressure waves. Various scientists over the years have suggested theories of fields and such helping to describe various principles, but we can't detect them. We also may never be able to detect them, and can only theorise their existence based on experimental tests of the theory. And the behaviour of such fields may be basically incomprehensible to the human mind - we need to deconstruct them to analogy or express them in a language of our creation (maths) that may be imperfect to their description.
If we apply that theory to this experiment, the field posses a wave that the particle is following. The field exists with its interference patterns whether a particle is present or not. When a particle is launched, it follows the field, so has 'knowledge' of the bigger picture (because the bigger picture is defined by the field). If so, the question becomes one of affecting this field with the detector and removing the waves, or of affecting the particle with the detector and having it ignore the field. The niceness of this theory is it works for particles and photons, because both are masses following the dictates of the field.
@ phil The light doesnt bounce or reflect, it does cancel out and get reinforced hence the interference pattern
The thing is the same result happens with atoms(allthough atoms do bounce) if 2 atoms make contact they do not cancel out they do not turn into nothing
but the above refers to many particles being sent through the slit
watch from 42:00 untill 46:20 (ish)
The thing is the same result happens with atoms(allthough atoms do bounce) if 2 atoms make contact they do not cancel out they do not turn into nothing
but the above refers to many particles being sent through the slit
watch from 42:00 untill 46:20 (ish)
Last edited:
