Can Multiple Routes in Wave-Particle Duality Be Observed?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter scilover89
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    History
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the concept of wave-particle duality in quantum mechanics, specifically exploring whether multiple routes taken by a particle can be observed. Participants examine the implications of Richard Feynman's suggestion that particles can traverse all possible paths and the effects of observation on these paths.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants reference Richard Feynman's idea that particles can take every possible route between two points, questioning the implications of this in terms of observation.
  • One participant asserts that while a particle follows all possible routes when not observed, observation causes the particle to collapse to a single route, as demonstrated by the two-slit experiment.
  • Another participant questions the reasoning behind the collapse of states upon observation, seeking clarification on whether this is a fundamental fact or has an underlying explanation.
  • Some participants suggest that the nature of measurement dictates that a system must be in a specified state after observation, implying that repeated measurements should yield consistent results.
  • There is a viewpoint that the collapse of states may be seen as a 'fact without reason,' indicating uncertainty about the underlying physics of this phenomenon.
  • Conversely, another participant argues that there is a rationale behind the collapse, although they acknowledge that clarity on this argument may be lacking.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of state collapse upon observation, with some seeing it as a fundamental aspect of quantum mechanics while others question its justification. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the reasons behind the collapse of states.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexity and ongoing debates within quantum mechanics, indicating that interpretations of the phenomena discussed may vary significantly.

scilover89
Messages
78
Reaction score
0
As many people here will know, particles have wave-particle duality. A American scientist, Richard Feyman, suggested that when a particle move from a point to another, the particle can move through every possible route, not only one route (or history) as described in classical theory. The route we observed is the only possible route.
The question is, if more than one route is possible will we observed more than one route?

p/s: I am still learning quantum mechanic, please correct me if I am wrong.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, we will not observe more than one route.

The particle will follow every possible route - all states will be superposed - as long as it is not *observed*. When observed, the states all collapse to one, which we observe.

This is what the two-slit experiment shows so clearly. If we do not observe which slit the photon passes through, then it passes through both, interferes with itself, and we see an interference pattern. If we put detectors at the slits, thus observing the photon, it is seen to pass through only one slit, and we get no interference pattern.

Thus, when not observed, the photon has experienced multiple superposed histories. When observed, it has experienced only one history.
 
Thanks, I think I know what you meant. But why must all states collapse to one when oberved? Is there a reason for this? Or this is just a fact without reason?
 
The nature of measurment is that!
When you say that the system is in one specified state , it means that if you make another measurment, you will find the system in that state again. If not, your measurment is not reasonable! and you can not trust on it. So every measurment put the system in the eigen state of the measured value
 
"But why must all states collapse to one when oberved? Is there a reason for this? Or this is just a fact without reason?"

I believe 'fact without reason' is about right.

I don't know if anyone knows the physics behind this yet - we undestand so little in this realm. It is only one interpretation of the observed data, afterall, and a hotly debated one at that. As we get farther and farther into QM, we find that the only meaningful answer is that there are no real-world explanations, and that it's all a matter of mathematical formulae.
 
I think it is not just "a fact without reason"
The argument behind it is about clear . Or maybe I think so!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K