Tag Info

New answers tagged

-1

Take - if you want - in your mind the fact that even a edge interact with a light source (a monochromatic point source give the best results) by the way that you could see fringes on a display behind the edge. So you have to ask why there is an area between shadow an "no shadow" which contains fringes. The answer is: Because the interaction between the ...


1

Yes, most certainly the shape of each slit affects the diffraction and interference patterns. I admit up front to being too lazy to write out the generalized solution, but if you grab any decent optics text, you'll get the integral formulas for the patterns as a function of slit shape. Qualitatively, you can see that a 'slanted' single slit will produce a ...


0

I am still trying to wrap my head around this experiment. A photon has properties such as frequency and intensity and momentum and direction, even when the observer instrument has "collapsed" the wave function. So a free photon is definitely always a wave (not solid). The detector's measurements tell us that both the "collapsed" photon and the "wave" ...


0

The main confusion comes from people not realizing that when one talks of wave particle duality the wave part belongs to the probability distribution which can be calculated using the quantum mechanical solutions for the problem at hand. The solutions are called wave functions because they have sinusoidal expressions which are characteristic of the ...


-2

As I'm sure that you are aware of, the explanation that you are looking for is currently missing. Today, a limited reasoning is handed to you, accompanied of course with mere mathematical equations used to replace an actual explanation. However, we can view what we understand at this time, and put these pieces together, thus at the same time not be ...


0

Maybe I should read Schrödinger's original article first, but I think its purpose is more to highlight deficits in the way some proponents of the Copenhagen interpretation presented that interpretation, rather than to highlight any fundamental problems in the interpretation itself. You are simply not supposed to ask questions or talk about any unobserved ...


3

Wave-particle duality is an old concept that doesn't have any meaningful explanation power. It's not how we approach quantum mechanics today. Truthfully, it's about as bad an idea to teach wave-particle duality, as it would be to introduce relativity with the detailed explanation of the ether, just to end that lesson with the phrase "and that's why the ether ...


6

If you search this site for wave particle duality or something similar you'll find lots of questions addressing this and related issues. The most complete description of particles we have is that they are excitations in a quantum field - this is called quantum field theory. Under some circumstances these excitations can behave like particles and under other ...


2

If you really want to understand how QM formalism relates to the Schroedinger's cat and the double slit experiment, you should study a QM textbook. To answer your question in a simple way: The double slit experiment is indeed consistent with the Copenhagen interpretation, in the sense that wave mechanics predicts the outcome of the experiment correctly. ...


1

The problem with the picture (and probably with your understanding of the physical process) is that it assumes photons as classical particles on well-defined trajectories. If this were a true picture of reality, your objection would be justified. This, however, is not so. In order to describe the process properly, one has to acknowledge the quantum nature ...


1

The photons do not have a well defined trajectory. The diagram shows them as if they were little balls travelling along a well defined path, however the photons are delocalised and don't have a specific position or direction of motion. The photon is basically a fuzzy sphere expanding away from the source and overlapping both slits. That's why it goes through ...


0

An experiment which should be able to be easy to perform by someone with access to a lab is to place two double slit experiments side by side. Have a BBO crystal create a downconverted photon pair and have each of the pair interact with their own double slit experiment. Close the outer exits to both double slit experiments. If both photons exit the inside ...


3

If you are saying that one electron (at a time) is used in the experiment, than one electron (at a time) must be observed at all circumstances, basically by definition. When no detectors are used to determine which slit the electron passed through, you still detect one electron on the screen, the probabilistic spatial distribution of which is such that when ...


0

The observation either results in the electron being there, or not being there. But once the electron has been observed going through one slit, it cannot also show up at the other slit. That would require there to be more than one electron. On the other hand, if the observer had an apparatus that resulted in 50-50 probability of observing an electron if it ...


0

Sure no problem, You could put a fiber bundle behind each slit and send the light to a PMT or other single photon counter. You'll get a pulse at one PMT or the other. And no interference pattern. In principle you can make the slits far enough apart that you can get rid of the fiber bundle and just have the single photon detector behind each slit.


0

In our macroscopic world it's possible to "measure" something without changing it by a significant amount. Usually when you take a measurement, you're throwing something (eg, incident light) into the system and then you catch the stuff that comes out (eg, reflected light). This works because the momentum of the incident light changes the momentum of the ...


1

If the frog/robot could tell which slit the photon came through, this is really identical to measuring the photon at the slits, which is discussed in every treatment of the double slit experiment. In short, the diffraction pattern is lost. If it cannot tell, then there is no new information you can get anyway.


1

The particle/wave duality is an old concept that has never done anything good for anyone (not even Einstein and de Broglie). It's time to let go of it, even among the "groupies". We know "how" quantum mechanics works and the answer is "neither". What you are basically asking is for an experiment that can decide between two outright wrong models. Obviously, ...



Top 50 recent answers are included