Timeline for How do “many worlds” theorists explain particle double-slit interference patterns?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 23, 2019 at 18:49 | comment | added | my2cts | The probability to detect a photon at a specific position by a sensor based on the electric dipole transition, as most of them are, is proportional to $|E|^2 $ by Fermi's golden rule. | |
| Oct 23, 2019 at 12:59 | comment | added | PhysicsDave | @my2cts What is taught at MIT for example is "The total instantaneous electric field E at the point P on the screen is equal to the vector sum of the two sources:E =E1 + E2 ." They do not add probability waves for the DS experiment in first year, that would likely be done at the PhD level. This classical approach works quite well to explain DS patterns and thin films. The probability wave for a photon (called photon wave function) is a difficult concept and the boundary conditions are required to calculate the probable paths, it is not as simple as saying the probability waves interfere. | |
| Oct 23, 2019 at 4:14 | comment | added | my2cts | @PhysicsDave This is very wrong | |
| Oct 22, 2019 at 22:20 | comment | added | PhysicsDave | The term 'interference' is historical and misleading but it is still taught today in high school and in early university courses. The interference explanation does work mathematically in many situations (double slit approximation, thin film interference). Ultimately it falls short as in single photon experiments where we realize there are no photons or no energy in the dark areas. The interference explanation is convenient and as well was the norm in the early days of physics .... early 1900s. Interference violates conservation of energy for photons. | |
| Oct 20, 2019 at 17:32 | comment | added | my2cts | Upon closer reading, I agree. Still you assume that the electron passes through one slit or the other, which precludes interference. You asked how interference was explained in MWI. If interference cannot be explained than MWI is not meaningful. | |
| Oct 20, 2019 at 17:30 | history | edited | my2cts | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 49 characters in body
|
| Oct 20, 2019 at 16:21 | comment | added | Jerry Guern | I didn't bypass interference, and I didn't ask whether MWI was meaningful. My question was specifically how interference is explained under MWI. | |
| Oct 20, 2019 at 14:42 | history | answered | my2cts | CC BY-SA 4.0 |