Timeline for Why when not observed in the double slit experiment, do we see light in places we do not see light when observed?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 12, 2023 at 2:34 | comment | added | FlatterMann | @PhysicsDave Physics is not religion, I am afraid. If a mental model doesn't work, then it simply doesn't work. Nobody has ever seen a particle, ever. What people have seen and what many are misidentifying as particles because they have never done actual experiments, are all just irreversible energy exchanges. | |
| May 12, 2023 at 1:21 | comment | added | PhysicsDave | @FlatterMann I believe in real particles and real forces .... I think most physicists do too! If we just have QFT fields and excitations of fields .... it's great theory but we have to add the reality to it. | |
| May 11, 2023 at 22:06 | comment | added | FlatterMann | @PhysicsDave There are no virtual particles. There are not even real particles. These are merely poor semi-classical mental models that do not fit the actually observed phenomenology. Trying to explain "interference" in particular is a very bad idea. Interference can only happen in systems in which there is no self-interaction, i.e. like all symmetry induced properties it is caused by the absence, rather than the presence of an actual mechanism. | |
| May 11, 2023 at 22:03 | comment | added | FlatterMann | @DrChinese Energy never had a path. It's a system property. It was that even in Einstein's time. He simply made the same mistake as the supporters of the phlogiston and aether: he objectified energy flow. When a detector absorbs a photon of energy, it tells us its position, not the path of the photon. That's irrelevant information. We already know where our detectors are. All we are "measuring" is the (classical) inhomogeneity in spacetime that we put there ourselves. "The double slit with detector" is such a silly mental game of poor thinking that it's not even funny. | |
| May 11, 2023 at 20:30 | comment | added | PhysicsDave | @DrChinese I'm more of a believer in "virtual" photons/forces in the EM field by excited electrons in atoms ... before "real" photon emission. The virtual fields being influenced by polarizers .... where they are orthogonal virtual fields are not possible ... thus no "interference" pattern for othorgonal polarizers. | |
| May 11, 2023 at 13:53 | comment | added | DrChinese | @FlatterMann I recognize the nuance that in orthodox QFT, photons don't have a "path" or "position" in any traditional sense. Yet, as PhysicsDave points out, the Feynman path integral model is still widely used in both theoretical and experimental papers. I follow common usage by saying that a photon's position is represented by a click on a detector and its path is however/whenever it went from its source to that detector. For discussion purposes, writers operate "as if" these photon properties are present. My references use this lingo exactly as I have. | |
| May 11, 2023 at 13:40 | comment | added | DrChinese | @PhysicsDave In the referenced setup: Photons are free to go through both slits in both the a) and b) scenarios. Hopefully we agree that when the polarizers are orthogonal, the effects of possible paths (or however you choose to refer to them) through one slit cannot affect the outcome of possible paths through the other. I think my use of the terms "interference (or interference pattern)" and "self-interference" are standard, and certainly follow the usage in both of my references. | |
| May 11, 2023 at 11:47 | comment | added | PhysicsDave | Feynman and his path integral (which he applied to light) were/are instrumental to understanding and are the basis for the modern physics theories we have today. Yes ... "interference" is a broadly misused/misunderstood term .... as is evident in the above answer. Dirac and Feynman may have even used the term perjoratively. In modern field theory energy can have a direction. | |
| May 11, 2023 at 5:24 | comment | added | FlatterMann | @PhysicsDave Interference is the absence of interaction. It's a phenomenon that can only exist in (almost) linear systems. To say that light interferes with itself is a misunderstanding of both classical and quantum superposition. That "photons" are objects that have a path is an old mistake that goes back to Einstein's 1905 paper about the photoelectric effect. It's time to abandon it. A photon is a (small) amount of electromagnetic field energy. | |
| May 10, 2023 at 22:37 | comment | added | PhysicsDave | All photons are self interfering all the time per Dirac and Feynman ... they determine their own paths ..... whether they go thru single or double slits. In your (a),(b) polarization examples a photon can choose either path in (a) but can only choose one path in (b). So I would not mix up the terminology of "self interference" with the term "interference pattern". | |
| May 10, 2023 at 21:41 | history | edited | DrChinese | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 237 characters in body
|
| May 10, 2023 at 21:18 | history | edited | DrChinese | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 14 characters in body
|
| May 10, 2023 at 21:12 | history | edited | DrChinese | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 14 characters in body
|
| May 10, 2023 at 21:03 | history | edited | DrChinese | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 14 characters in body
|
| May 10, 2023 at 18:59 | history | edited | DrChinese | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 21 characters in body
|
| May 10, 2023 at 18:53 | history | answered | DrChinese | CC BY-SA 4.0 |