eloheim
Apr12-11, 11:20 AM
Hello guys I was a confused by this part of the Wiki article on "Double-slit experiment":
It is a widespread misunderstanding that, when two slits are open but a detector is added to the experiment to determine which slit a photon has passed through, then the interference pattern no longer forms and the experimental apparatus yields two simple patterns, one from each slit, superposed without interference[12][citation needed]. Such a result would be obtained only if the results of two experiments were superposed in which either one or the other slit is closed. However, there are many other methods to determine whether a photon passed through a slit, for instance by placing an atom at the position of each slit and monitoring whether one of these atoms is influenced by a photon passing it. In general, in such experiments, the interference pattern will be changed but not be completely wiped out. Interesting experiments of this latter kind have been performed with photons[9] and with neutrons.
It seems like all the (popular physics) accounts I'm familiar with go out of their way to endorse exactly the point in question. Is the author of the wiki article trying to impress that "detection" is not an all-or-nothing proposition, and therefore the act of it doesn't neccesarily destroy the interference pattern (as in completely)??
It is a widespread misunderstanding that, when two slits are open but a detector is added to the experiment to determine which slit a photon has passed through, then the interference pattern no longer forms and the experimental apparatus yields two simple patterns, one from each slit, superposed without interference[12][citation needed]. Such a result would be obtained only if the results of two experiments were superposed in which either one or the other slit is closed. However, there are many other methods to determine whether a photon passed through a slit, for instance by placing an atom at the position of each slit and monitoring whether one of these atoms is influenced by a photon passing it. In general, in such experiments, the interference pattern will be changed but not be completely wiped out. Interesting experiments of this latter kind have been performed with photons[9] and with neutrons.
It seems like all the (popular physics) accounts I'm familiar with go out of their way to endorse exactly the point in question. Is the author of the wiki article trying to impress that "detection" is not an all-or-nothing proposition, and therefore the act of it doesn't neccesarily destroy the interference pattern (as in completely)??