HUP and the Double Slit Experiment

[strategery101]

But isn't the act of just watching the photons without using a "device" still observing? Why would it make an interference pattern when we look at it? If the act of observing makes it behave like a particle and not a wave, why does it still give the interference pattern when we watch it? I don't get how observing it with a detector is any different than observing with our eyes. They are both acts of observation on the photon. Maybe the device has some effect on the outcome?

[Prepoceros]

@strategery101 The observation only affects the outcome if the "observer" can tell which slit the particle went through. Looking at it with our eyes is not enough because we can't see the particles directly, so we can't tell which slit each one went through.

[capetorial]

@Prepoceros its like this, imo: if i look at something w/ my eyes, i dont affect it, but if i use a flashlight to see it, im affecting it. in the double-slit experiment, their measuring device (observer) affected the experiment because it had a "flashlight." im dumbing it down a LOT for people that dont understand, i hope those that understand better will not think im a dumbass w/ the way im speaking.

[badbeatbri3]

@capetorial

If only the scientists had thought of this possibility, it would have saved us all from a fraudulent 200-year-old mystery! You, sir, are a genius. Oh...wait...I remember now. They actually DID think of that. You see, they left the sensors (your flashlight) on BUT did not record what the sensors detected. Amazingly, the interference (wave) pattern resulted. Therefore, they were able to rule out the sensors themselves as any factor. Never mind about that genius comment earlier

[SASNIGHTCRAWLER]

@Prepoceros Hi, i know exactly where you are, but i dont know what your doing lol what do you think about this double slit, do you think the static and electromagnetic screen, effect the quanta when its on or off? People have told me they dont agree with this experiment and think they have faked it, i think if one can coat a plate in a single layer or very thin layer of silicon atoms and send atoms or particles the same way, with and without observation, you may work it out ?

[Gargonzolo]

If more people would just post half-assed regurgitations of theories they used to have some understanding of, we'd all benefit a lot. No shame in that game!

[77GSlinger]

Electrons are not particles and so this theory has no legs. It is just more ad hoc guesses typical of quackademia, which enslaves humanity to false view of Cosmology. The double slit experiment is a fraud because once again electrons are not "marbles, balls, particles etc. or any other nonsense atttributed to them. They are expanding em wave forms and have nothing to do with the theoretical mythematical electron of the nuke atom, becaue the nuke atom does not exist, it has been debunked severely

[sirtwizt]

@77GSlinger omg. Finally. Someone with some sense. People's heads are so full of myths like electrons and protons they cannot see what is right in front of them! the universe behaves like a giant fluid. particle physics has been dead a long time ago and is only taught in the lower class civilian sector of society so people won't look into the night sky and figure out what's really going on.

[77GSlinger]

@sirtwizt Well said and Thank you for making yourself so well informed. You are doing a great service for your self and humanity by being mentally prepared. You will be able to help many others when the SHTF. Best Wishes

[Simmer1983]

Hup Holland Hup! :p

[ripican]

Just shorten the width of the gaps or slits to make them so tiny that you could not even see them with the naked eye, that'll do it....

[Jarrodmontelius]

double slit experiment is the key to deeper thinking

[jimgiunta]

In view of the Heisenberg's Uncertantity Principle, if by any means we could know the position and momentum of a sub-atomic particle, would it change the physics of the universe, and would/could we still be able to inhabit it?

[youVSmee]

@jimgiunta

According to the Quantum Eraser principle, you would actually be able to measure the momentum and the position at the same time. Why? Well, because that experiment shows how the particles are able to "recommunicate" with each other even after a particles information path was erased.

[JustusScottJr]

is it possible that the "detector" (whatever that is) is interfering with the movement of the particles? It doesn't make sense that measuring something effects it's action unless the measuring is itself interfering with the natural action. I imagine measuring the speed of a river by putting a rotating blade in it. The blade would slow down the water. This of course has nothing to do with the actual experiment, but just an example.

[Prepoceros]

@JustusScottJr Yes, that the part that makes these results remarkable. Somehow, the act of observing the photon causes the particle to go through one slit or the other, whereas when it wasn't observed, the particle seemed to go through both slits simultaneously. And it doesn't matter what the detector is; anything that can tell which slit the photon goes through produces the same result.

[JustusScottJr]

@Prepoceros I just watched another video that said that they could leave the "detectors" on, but not have the instrument record what detectors found, and still get the wave. Somehow that means that it is not the device but the act of observing that is effecting the action of the particle. That makes no sense whatsoever. There has to be another explanation. The other option would be that the electron is sentient. If that is the case then we should be able to test it and see the same results.

[Prepoceros]

@JustusScottJr I know, right? It makes absolutely no sense in our normal way of thinking about things. That's why the double-slit experiment is so fascinating - it's one of the easiest-to-describe examples of how insanely weird quantum physics is.

[SASNIGHTCRAWLER]

@Prepoceros Hi, ive watched the electron slit expo and under observation it acts as matter would i.e. in 2 def lines...Not under obs it defs in wave patterns. now has anyone attempted to work out why? has it ever been theorised that all matter/energy that changes form needs energy in order to do this?Has anyone attempted to emit ELF''s without obs in the test area? we know brain waves are energy, and would it not be an idea that this energy, at god knows what frequency could trigger the change?

[Prepoceros]

@SASNIGHTCRAWLER Yes, many many people have tried to work out why this happens. They've come to a variety of conclusions.

"has it ever been theorised that all matter/energy that changes form needs energy in order to do this?"

Not with any seriousness, I don't imagine. It's a very strongly tested principle of modern physics that total energy is always conserved, even when it switches back and forth between energy and matter. This is what E=mc^2 means, more or less.

[SASNIGHTCRAWLER]

@Prepoceros tes, Sorry...i mean matter could be another state of energy, but not EMF energy like photons etc The matter could be in its natural form, (waves of matter) and not solid. It would take true energy we know about(emf) to energize it or trigger it into solid matter as seen when observing it.At the speed of light it would lose mass and solidity based on Alberts idea, and resourt back into energy wave form as it would lose its photonic activatior, and infinate mass/energy would be correct

[SASNIGHTCRAWLER]

@Prepoceros Yes total energy would be constant, but in 2 forms of energy which we now see is true, when energy at the speed of light gains infinate mass or energy, it resourts back into energy, which in this case would be true, because mass is energy and if we can find the true frequency of energy in its un observed form, we could either create matter from energy, or turn matter back into energy, which could be good, but not for us if Iran found out how to do it..lol

[SASNIGHTCRAWLER]

@Prepoceros It could also explain that energy(photon) can do th same and mimic matter, this could mean, matter and energy are either the same thing or very much alike indeed..

[MBTEVENTS]

@JustusScottJr May I suggest Tom Campbell's explanation of the double slit experiment? @mbtevents

channel NY videos 4 and 5.

[youVSmee]

@JustusScottJr

If you think that the Double Slit experiment was strange, well you should check out the "Delay Double Slit" and the "Quantum Eraser" experiments. I have a video which explains the Quantum Eraser, and I am thinking about making a video which explains the Delayed Double Slit experiment. In short, the Quantum

[youVSmee]

@Just .......Eraser erases the "path taken" of one of the particles, while the other particle registers at the screen "b4" its paired particle. Yet they recommunicate & create an interference pattern.

[chrisofnottingham]

I think the interpretation part is that not only can you not know momentum and position to more than a certain accuracy at the the same time, which could be an instrumentation principle, but that the photon really doesn't have momentum and position to more than a certain accuracy at the the same time. And knowing or not knowing one affects the range that the photon has of the other.

Also the issue of whether the wave function is a photon or a phenomenon caused by not knowing about the photon.

[spinroom]

take it off!!!

[jeffkosmo]

In the experiments where only a single photon is allowed to approach the slits at a time, if in fact a photon occasionally interferes with itself, one would expect that occasionally, the launched photon would fail to appear on the detector screen.

Do you know if this is true?

On the other hand, if a launched photon ALWAYS appears somewhere on the screen, at its full intensity, then something is fubar with the "wave" theory.

[Prepoceros]

@jeffkosmo The photon interfering with itself is what causes it to appear in certain places on the screen in the first place. When a photon interferes with itself, it doesn't disappear, it just has a different probability distribution of possible positions than it did before.

[SASNIGHTCRAWLER]

@Prepoceros They will confiscate my UFO for this lol

[CharmedQuarkZ99]

There is a video by "Dr. Quantum" called "The Double Slit Experiment". It is done in animation and its intended audience is most likely 'lay' people like me who are interested in the chotic, random and unpredictable quantum world. Without going into all the math; it basically shows how bizzar that an electron 'seems' to 'know' it is being watched. It behaves as both wave and particle. Duality has long been accepted I think? My comment got me some interesting channel comments from a physicist.

[KirkWaligora]

Having a fundamental knowledge on this subject, I believe you have explained this phenomenon quite well.

Thank you for the video.

[chrisofnottingham]

Thanks for the vid Prepoceros.

So, is it true that when we see the 'light full on' interference pattern, what we are really seeing is the pattern of many individual photons at the same time -just as with the accumulated single photons?

What I mean is, we are not seeing waves interfering classically, like in a swimming pool where the whole wave exists all at once, we are seeing the collapse of the probability wave to a single point but for many waves/photons at once.

Damn this 500 characters!

[Prepoceros]

@chrisofnottingham Yes, I think it could be interpreted that way. I imagine the photons also interfere with each other, so that would contribute as well. It must add up to the same pattern, though.

[SASNIGHTCRAWLER]

@Prepoceros Just like mixing araldite glue, you need both tubes mixed to create the interaction and then solid state?

[annamraju]

How about cat watches does this wave function collapses or not?

[Front24237]

You cannot know both the exact position and the exact momentum of a particle. You can know one or the other but not both. By knowing the position of the photon you have changed it's dual nature, and it must react according to the nature you have observed, the nature of a particle. A cat cannot, with the naked eye, know the exact position of the particle nature of the photon (as opposed to the wave nature) and thus cannot change its dual nature to just that of a particle... Head hurt yet?

[MeXxXiCaLiEnTe]

u go back now euro, u fuuuuuuu to b in tx, y?

[darthspeaks]

Why not pull your own teeth out before you start meth heading? You stupid shit ... stay away from Meth you dip shit.

[dasilva94]

Hi Preposceros,

Brilliant exposition of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and, the concept of wave particle duality.

May I ask since you are very much into science and scientific concepts, why have you decided to go on to study law, if I'm not being to nosy?

[Prepoceros]

I'm planning to go into patent law, which combines science, the law, and an ability to write about technical concepts in a precise way. It's a great fit for my skills and interests.

[mikma]

long time no see,,,,mikma was here

[144md]

You really helped me out. I am doing a project ofr school on this, and your video was very informative.

what exactly are you studying for?

[tamlin2day]

.. or even a bikini video?

[tamlin2day]

Will you ever make a bikni video?

[asbani991]

dude your' sick, but if she does that pls send me the link anyway. I don't want to miss it

[mranenome]

There's a recorded lecture by Richard Feynman entitled 'quantum behavior' in which he explains the double slit experiment (and the uncertainty principle) really well. Only reason I know anything about the subject. It's from April 3, 1962. About six months before I was born.

[Gerbear1964]

Wow, you would make a grat teacher, but doesn't pay as well as lawyer. I understood a bit of what you talked about, but I always watch your vids.

[DarwinsHamster]

Wow, wow, wow. No diagrams, no notes, and no nonsense. Perfectly clear explanation of what I believe you intended to convey.

I don't know where my head was at the time I made my video, but I do know that at the time I started watching this video I realize that I confuse a few things in my mind that you separated clearly. I will discuss that in a future video (but not immeidately).

Thank you! This was great!

[Prepoceros]

Ha, I don't know about perfectly clear, but I'm glad I could help a little bit.

Very much looking forward to the rest of your Heisenberg/transform series.

[HKurck]

Aah, the slit experiment, that makes sense, no really :). Haha, funny auditive representation of the intensity of the light :D

This vid is totally different from what you usually make :O Though I like it :)