Is this one more experiment which is the victim of how news generally hypes stuff like this?
This is a section from the article:
Australian scientists have recreated a famous experiment and confirmed quantum physics's bizarre predictions about the nature of reality, by proving that reality doesn't actually exist until we measure it - at least, not on the very small scale.
That all sounds a little mind-meltingly complex, but the experiment poses a pretty To successfully recreate the experiment, the team trapped a bunch of helium atoms in a suspended state known as a Bose-Einstein condensate, and then ejected them all until there was only a single atom left.
This chosen atom was then dropped through a pair of laser beams, which made a grating pattern that acted as a crossroads that would scatter the path of the atom, much like a solid grating would scatter light.
They then randomly added a second grating that recombined the paths, but only after the atom had already passed the first grating.
When this second grating was added, it led to constructive or destructive interference, which is what you'd expect if the atom had travelled both paths, like a wave would. But when the second grating was added, no interference was observed, as if the atom chose only one path.
The fact that this second grating was only added after the atom passed through the first crossroads suggests that the atom hadn't yet determined its nature before being measured a second time.
So if you believe that the atom did take a particular path or paths at the first crossroad, this means that a future measurement was affecting the atom's path, explained Truscott. "The atoms did not travel from A to B. It was only when they were measured at the end of the journey that their wave-like or particle-like behaviour was brought into existence," he said.
Some of the things about this really confuse me, especially the claim that a future measurement affected the path the atom would end up taking. How literal are they being when they say this? (I don't think they are.)
Does this have any serious implications on QM or its interpretations?