Skip to main content
Physics

Return to Question

edited tags
Source Link
Qmechanic ♦
Qmechanic ♦
  • 213.1k
  • 48
  • 590
  • 2.3k

Let’s describe briefly the Michelson Morley-Morley experiment in terms of single photons. A photon is launched by a laser from point A and meets the BS beam-splitter 50/50 in point B. Then it has two equal possibilities.

  1. to pass to screen S in some point D
  2. to be reflected to a mirror M above in point C, then back to point B or near it. Then it can pass straight down through the BS and not fall on the screen.
  3. It can also be reflected and go to the screen say also in point D One can adjust M position so as to observe the interference pattern from many photons on the screen S (this is done routinely in Michelson Morley experiment every time before rotating on 90 degrees).

Now as every photons interferes only with itself by Dirac, in Copenhagen interpretation the two possibilities ABD and ABCBD should interfere. But the path ABD is much shorter than ABCBD. So it turns out that one possibility should wait for the other to join in point D (e.g. it must be instantaneous on BCB which of course is nonsense). This problem also arises in DSE as the paths from the two holes to a point D (different from the center) on the screen are not equal. But by very little. In MME the difference is great. Also if we move M very far from BS the probability ABCBD would not be affected, whereas I am sure that after moving M beyond coherence length there would not be an interference pattern. Which is disagreement with Copenhagen.

Let’s describe briefly the Michelson Morley experiment in terms of single photons. A photon is launched by a laser from point A and meets the BS beam-splitter 50/50 in point B. Then it has two equal possibilities.

  1. to pass to screen S in some point D
  2. to be reflected to a mirror M above in point C, then back to point B or near it. Then it can pass straight down through the BS and not fall on the screen.
  3. It can also be reflected and go to the screen say also in point D One can adjust M position so as to observe the interference pattern from many photons on the screen S (this is done routinely in Michelson Morley experiment every time before rotating on 90 degrees).

Now as every photons interferes only with itself by Dirac, in Copenhagen interpretation the two possibilities ABD and ABCBD should interfere. But the path ABD is much shorter than ABCBD. So it turns out that one possibility should wait for the other to join in point D (e.g. it must be instantaneous on BCB which of course is nonsense). This problem also arises in DSE as the paths from the two holes to a point D (different from the center) on the screen are not equal. But by very little. In MME the difference is great. Also if we move M very far from BS the probability ABCBD would not be affected, whereas I am sure that after moving M beyond coherence length there would not be an interference pattern. Which is disagreement with Copenhagen.

Let’s describe briefly the Michelson-Morley experiment in terms of single photons. A photon is launched by a laser from point A and meets the BS beam-splitter 50/50 in point B. Then it has two equal possibilities.

  1. to pass to screen S in some point D
  2. to be reflected to a mirror M above in point C, then back to point B or near it. Then it can pass straight down through the BS and not fall on the screen.
  3. It can also be reflected and go to the screen say also in point D One can adjust M position so as to observe the interference pattern from many photons on the screen S (this is done routinely in Michelson Morley experiment every time before rotating on 90 degrees).

Now as every photons interferes only with itself by Dirac, in Copenhagen interpretation the two possibilities ABD and ABCBD should interfere. But the path ABD is much shorter than ABCBD. So it turns out that one possibility should wait for the other to join in point D (e.g. it must be instantaneous on BCB which of course is nonsense). This problem also arises in DSE as the paths from the two holes to a point D (different from the center) on the screen are not equal. But by very little. In MME the difference is great. Also if we move M very far from BS the probability ABCBD would not be affected, whereas I am sure that after moving M beyond coherence length there would not be an interference pattern. Which is disagreement with Copenhagen.

Source Link
Mercury
Mercury
  • 679
  • 3
  • 16

A simple fact I can not explain to myself using Copenhagen interpretation?

Let’s describe briefly the Michelson Morley experiment in terms of single photons. A photon is launched by a laser from point A and meets the BS beam-splitter 50/50 in point B. Then it has two equal possibilities.

  1. to pass to screen S in some point D
  2. to be reflected to a mirror M above in point C, then back to point B or near it. Then it can pass straight down through the BS and not fall on the screen.
  3. It can also be reflected and go to the screen say also in point D One can adjust M position so as to observe the interference pattern from many photons on the screen S (this is done routinely in Michelson Morley experiment every time before rotating on 90 degrees).

Now as every photons interferes only with itself by Dirac, in Copenhagen interpretation the two possibilities ABD and ABCBD should interfere. But the path ABD is much shorter than ABCBD. So it turns out that one possibility should wait for the other to join in point D (e.g. it must be instantaneous on BCB which of course is nonsense). This problem also arises in DSE as the paths from the two holes to a point D (different from the center) on the screen are not equal. But by very little. In MME the difference is great. Also if we move M very far from BS the probability ABCBD would not be affected, whereas I am sure that after moving M beyond coherence length there would not be an interference pattern. Which is disagreement with Copenhagen.