Double Slit Experiment No Mystery
billwadge.wordpress.com
Double Slit Experiment No Mystery
1–10 of 124 posts
Re: Double Slit Experiment No Mystery
#21. It’s very nice to be introduced to Landé and Duane.
2. After so much emphasis on reason and experiment and evidence, it is jarring to switch gears to a conspiracy theory about scientists concealing or ignoring theories in order to make themselves seem “superhuman.”
3. It’s very nice to be introduced to Landé and Duane.
Re: Double Slit Experiment No Mystery
#3Getting some real crackpot vibes here.
How does Duane's hypothesis account for the diffraction pattern going away if the particular slit the particle goes through is measured?
Re: Double Slit Experiment No Mystery
#4This explanation doesn't seem to leave any room for the experimental observation that simply knowing which slit the electron went through - not some physical interaction that disturbs it but simply having that knowledge - changes the pattern.
Re: Double Slit Experiment No Mystery
#5When I watched a goofy layman’s explanation[1] about the double slit, it stressed the importance of the effects of observation on the behavior or nature of the electrons.
When observed to see “which” slit the light passed through, they no longer created the interference pattern described by Duane’s law. And when left unobserved (at the slits) the interference pattern emerged even when shooting “one electron at a time” at the slits.
Does this article or Duane’s Law cover or appreciate this? It seems like it only describes the interference pattern.
Re: Double Slit Experiment No Mystery
#6This misses whole swathes of the double slit experiment.
It doesn't cover the Observer problem, which means it doesn't acknowledge duality, which (you would have to assume) means it doesn't even recognise delayed-choice quantum erasers.
At the risk of getting downvoted to oblivion I feel like the author needs to study up on quite a bit more of this research as there's a much larger body of evidence than that which is countered in the article.
Re: Double Slit Experiment No Mystery
#7Actually the mysteries are deeper. This one can't explain "Delayed Choice Quantum Erasure" experiments, which is also a double slit experiment. But the arrangement allows you to detect the path AFTER the photon has traveled through one of the slits and hit the surface. Now after the photon has hit the surface you can decide whether to detect its path or not. A delayed choice. But based on your later choice the interference pattern of the photon from a time from the past appears, or doesn't.
This is the main reason why some scientists come up with many world interpretation. This article doesn't even touch the surface of it.
Re: Double Slit Experiment No Mystery
#8Getting some real crackpot vibes here. How does Duane's hypothesis account for the diffraction pattern going away if the particular slit the particle goes through is measured?
If he had read the article that he linked to, he’d see that duane’s hypothesis is a special case that can be derived from quantum mechanics.
I don’t believe that you can derive the rest of quantum mechanics from duane’s hypothesis.
Re: Double Slit Experiment No Mystery
#9The wave/particle duality notion isn't really meant to hold an accurate deep insight into QM, it's just meant to inform intuitions, and sorta communicate it to laypeople.
Re: Double Slit Experiment No Mystery
#10This explanation doesn't seem to leave any room for the experimental observation that simply knowing which slit the electron went through - not some physical interaction that disturbs it but simply having that knowledge - changes the pattern.
How would you know which slit the particle went through without physically interacting with it?