0
$\begingroup$

In https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378437109010401, the author claims that the interference pattern obtained in the double-slit experiment does not need a wave description of matter, and can be accounted for by the "quantized momentum transfer" from the slits to the electron. Here, the whole slit structure is regarded as a quantum object with several eigenstates, which transfers a quantized momentum to the incident particle. Momentum quantization is a result of the "Duane's quantization rule".

My question is, how come can a large macroscopic object like the slit structure be a quantum object? What determines what eigenstate it's in (the configuration of its atoms or something else for example)? The author admits that the mechanism of the momentum transfer is unknown, so isn't such an explanation weird, and why should it be considered?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If you look around you can find several cases of authors finding alternate explantions for various quantum phenomena and getting them published in mainstream journals (which requires considerable physics chops because such proposals will be scrutinized). But the questions then arise (a) are they easier, clearer or more parsimonious than the existing framework and (b) can they be extended are far and successfully as the existing framework. $\endgroup$
    – dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten
    Commented Mar 19, 2019 at 2:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Having written the above comment I looked at the abstract. This paper (from 2009) extends one by the same author from 1967, which might just represent a return to the subject after a long time or might suggest that extending the theory is non-trivial. $\endgroup$
    – dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten
    Commented Mar 19, 2019 at 2:47

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
0
$\begingroup$

My question is, how come can a large macroscopic object like the slit structure be a quantum object?

The underlying level of all macroscopic objects is quantum mechanical, and the double slit experiment is a quantum mechanical scattering "electron impinges on two slits a given distance apart and a given width" . A single electron is a quantum mechanical entity and interacts with the ambient spill over electric fields of the atoms and molecules composing the slits.

Clear examples of macroscopic quantum mechanical objects are crystals. Also superconductors and superfluids.

What determines what eigenstate it's in (the configuration of its atoms or something else for example)?

In my statement above I would consider the the ambient electric fields and virtual photon exchanges with the atoms and molecules of the slits would set the boundary conditions. In the model you are discussing it is up to the physicist proposing it to convince the peer review that it is a correct model ( I do not have access to the paper.)

why should it be considered?

It has not created a revolution since 2010. A lot of theoretical papers are written continuously, that does not mean they have to be considered instead of the simpler models.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ In quantum mechanics, the wavefunction suddenly collapses into one of the eigenstates upon observation, and this is a random process. On the other hand, if one assumes that there is just one possible eigenstate, determined by the atoms making up the slits, or ambient electric fields, etc, the process shouldn't be random in principle. This way, we mean that the randomness is just due to our ignorance of the states of atoms or E fields, which reduces quantum mechanics to classical statistical mechanics. $\endgroup$
    – Alex L
    Commented Mar 19, 2019 at 16:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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