I think I might have figured the double-slit experiment out. I am not going to explain it here, Google it if you don't know it. If I am wrong please tell me why:

Matter are relative to observers right (mass, time etc)? So let's for argument say there are 10 observers on earth.

When the particle leaves the gun towards the film, it will be relative to the 10 observers. Now the particle will exist in 10 states relative to each observer. If observers move faster than other, these states might even have different mass than other. So, because they exist in more than one state, they are actually different instances, one for each observer. So these states interfere with each other. That is why you get an interference pattern on the film from one particle, it is one particle in different states interfering with itself.

But what will happen when one of these observers observe it? He will only see one particle. He is not aware of the states relative to the other observers. Because there is only one particle according to an observer, the particle will act as one and the interference pattern will be gone. If it is not observed, it exist in relation to all observers. But according to an observer, there is only one. Think of it this way: Matter exist in relation to all observers, a state per observer. When you observe it, you can actually see the state relative to you. So by observing the particle coming through the slit, I can only see the state relative to me. But if I don't observe it, it exist in states relative to all observers.

Think of it this way: Let's assume there are only two people in the world. One (call him John) goes into orbit around the earth, he will be moving faster than the one (call him Matt) on earth. Now let's say he has a watch in his pocket. After 1 year he moved fast enough to lose 10 minutes relative to the person on earth. In John's reality 1 year passed, while in Matt's reality 1 year and 10 minutes passed. (We are already seeing this for satellites and is proven by experiment) For Matt the watch will be incorrect, while for John the watch will be correct (he experienced the same amount of time as the watch). Now the watch will exist in two states, one for each observer. In one state it will be 1 year old, in the other state it will be 1 year and 10 minutes old. When John observes it, it is in one state, but when Matt observes it, it will be in a state older. It exists in two states, same watch. Now when the two observers do not move much in relation to each other, it will still exist in two states, close enough to interfere with itself. That is why the particle interferes with itself. But when John see the watch, he can only see one. That is why I think the particle collapses back to one instance as soon as it is observed. It is basic relativity, I'll work on the equations, and post more on it.

To clarify: 1) Particle is not observed: It it exist in relation to all observers. These relations interfere with each other and cause a interference pattern, even though there is one particle. Up until it hits the film, it exist in may states, causing the wave interface pattern. 2) Particle is observed at the slit, so now it acts in relation to the observer that observed it. The interference pattern is gone because the detector and film is in essence the same observer, it forms part of the same experiment device. So the particle will only act in relation to the one observer.

So the question here is, does this theory conform to the scientific model?


closed as unclear what you're asking by Kyle Kanos, Jim, ACuriousMind, David Z Jan 7 '15 at 23:48

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Is there a question here? $\endgroup$ – Kyle Kanos Jan 7 '15 at 19:41
  • $\begingroup$ Yea, is this an answer to explain the experiment? $\endgroup$ – Philip Jan 7 '15 at 19:44
  • $\begingroup$ Interesting idea. I really like it! I'm thinking, though - wouldn't the state of the particle then depend on the observers? If everyone started moving with the same velocity, or at least made their motions somewhat coherent, wouldn't it change the results? Do we ever observe something like that; different probability density functions found for the same experiment repeated at different times? ...although part of me wonders if all of the reference frames (presumably of each particle) in the universe would ever be coherent enough, by chance, that the experiment would change enough to measure. $\endgroup$ – doublefelix Jan 7 '15 at 19:53
  • $\begingroup$ 10 people choose a tree to be cut and then are going out of the forest. What are the Eigenstates of this tree until one is observing the tree? $\endgroup$ – HolgerFiedler Jan 7 '15 at 20:37
  • $\begingroup$ Note: we generally frown upon questions showcasing unpublished personal theories. See meta.physics.stackexchange.com/q/356/23473 or meta.physics.stackexchange.com/q/4538/23473 $\endgroup$ – Jim Jan 7 '15 at 20:53

The interference pattern doesn't care of the observers, they are formed in the system where the photographic plate is at rest with respect to the gun. Observers have no role, because the photographic plate is the one that records the pattern.

One single particle forms no pattern, whether observed or not. I think you confuse the "which way" problem typical to the 2slit experiment, giving it another form.

There is no harm if the observer observes the recording of the particle. He will see that particle after particle being recorded by the photographic plate, generate an interference pattern. That, if the plate is placed at a distance from the two slits, n the region where the fascicles coming from the two slits interfere. But if the observer observes the particle near the slit, he disturbs the fascicle coming from that slit, destroying the interference, i.e. one won't get anymore interference on the photographic plate.

In rigorous terms, we say that doing observation near the slits, or near one slit, we disturb the part of the wave-function coming through that slit. For obtaining the interference pattern, no disturbance it permitted before the particle impresses the photographic plate.

  • $\begingroup$ I know that. I don't think you understand what I am saying. I edited my post to be more clear and what I am asking. $\endgroup$ – Philip Jan 8 '15 at 7:58
  • $\begingroup$ I am reading your question, but still, we don't get interference because there are different states from the point of views of the observers. What matters, is what "sees" the photographic plate, not what states ascribe the observers to the beams exiting the two slits. The formation of the interference pattern appears because there are two fascicles (due to the two slits), and at a suitable distance from the slits they overlap, forming maxima and minima. The 10 observers should not touch the fascicles before these hit the photographic plate. $\endgroup$ – Sofia Jan 8 '15 at 8:14

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.