# Tag Info

1

It's an issue of contrast; in the classical wave experiment there is plenty of data, and the contrast between the peaks and valleys is very clear; but when you are counting one-by-one the pixelation remains obvious. Pixelation can be reduced by (a) more gray levels in each pixel, and (b) more pixels per unit of area. You can simulate this by taking off ...

2

The spatial coherence is due to the fact that even for a single emitted photon it's the same wave that reach the 2 slits. I'm noot too sure what you mean by that. Spatial coherence has nothing to do with photons, it comes from the apparent size of the source as seen by the observer. Every source you might want to use in an interference experiment (a ...

2

As for your last question, a similar experiment has been done though it doesn't involve a double-slit. It's called the Michelson experiment, and using mirrors it tests the interference pattern created by light when the light-waves are combined with time-delayed versions of themselves. By changing the distance of one of the mirrors, the time-delay can be ...

0

You can get it as "clean" as you want - use sensors that only respond to a narrow wavelength (eg something so unlikely that it almost must be from your source...not IR for example!), set up your experiment so that the source will, statistically, emit a single photon every day or two to avoid the possibility that you're getting interference from the source ...

2

The key is in your words "to ... appear". I believe that it's a perceptual issue with how your brain processes the two kinds of images: a smooth rendering or a pixelated rendering. There is another possibility. In order to be sensitive to single photons, the detector is also going to be sensitive to very low-level noise. An image taken with a bright ...

0

Apologies everyone, I misunderstood this question greatly. It's talking about the first dark fringe (or the zeroth order dark fringe) which occurs in between 0 and 1. I understand now.

0

It's not m=0. The sin of d ( or the angle that you will find the dark spots) is equal to ( m+1/2) times the wavelength. m=0,1,2,3.........

2

Let's say we could perform the experiment with $W^\pm$ bosons. These particles are similar to electrons, but the possible spin states are $-1,0,+1$, that is, three different possibilities. The magnetic moment of these bosons is, therefore, $$\mu_z=\begin{cases} -\mu_W\\\phantom{+}0\\+\mu_W\end{cases}$$ where $\mu_W=6\ 10^{-6}\ \mu_B$ is the $W$ magneton. ...

0

It is possible that the wavelike behavior in a double slit experiment is just the outcome of particle distribution. One example is on my link at the top of my page. No one has ever offered any justification as to why particles can be proven wrong and waves can be proven right. No one can even explain how a wave without a medium can work. On the other hand ...

0

The nearest possible analogy to a Galton board will be a quantised electric field, interacting between the electric fields of surface electrons from the edges of a slit and the electric field of the particle (an electron or a photon), one direct to the slit. A common field would explain even the longtime distribution pattern from single shoted particles and ...

0

There is an interesting detail about the intensity distribution behind edges from photons and electrons. The shadow from photons is smaller the "geometrical" shadow. The shadow behind an edge, built from electrons is always wider than geometrical shadow. This could be explained by the interaction between the electric field of the sharp edge (the surface ...

3

Photons don't have an associated wave function. You either use the (fully classical) Maxwell's equations for the electromagnetic field (without photons) or Quantum Electrodynamics (which doesn't work with wave functions at all). For more details, see What equation describes the wavefunction of a single photon?.

4

The double-slit experiment is a one-body experiment, meaning that one is only looking at interferences of one particle with itself. Thus the Bose or Fermi statistics does not play a role in that case. What the OP has in mind in the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect, which for bosons implies that there is an increased probability that two identical bosons will be ...

1

In this experiment a changeable detection is designed Overall, the results suggest that the type of scattering an electron undergoes determines the mark it leaves on the back wall, and that a detector at one of the slits can change the type of scattering. The physicists concluded that, while elastically scattered electrons can cause an interference ...

0

No. The strange behavior of the photons is directly related to the observation of which slit the photon passes through. Once it is no longer an observer, and by observer we mean that we detect the presence of a photon, the results change. The original experiment kept the detector in place and simply did not activate it, so it would have had the same ...

1

Circular polarisation can be though of as a horizontally polarised wave together with a vertically polarised wave which is $\frac \pi 2$ out of phase with the horizontally polarised wave. With the two slit arrangement that you have described let the horizontal components of the circularly polarised light from each slit be in phase with one another and these ...

0

A lot of popular science articles may state that wavefunction collapse happens when a quantum system is observed, but this is misleading. It seems to imply you need to have a sentient being looking at the system (measuring it) in order for the wavefunction to collapse, which is definitely not true. In fact, wavefunction collapse happens whenever a quantum ...

Top 50 recent answers are included