The Human Eye as a Detector in Double-Slit Experiment

In summary, the conversation revolves around the possibility of using the human eye as a replacement for mechanical detectors in the double-slit experiment. A 2016 study tested this idea and found that while an interference pattern was detected, the human eye could not detect light as a particle. The discrepancy between prediction and result suggests that there may be differences in detection results between mechanical and biological devices. However, the validity of using the human eye for such experiments is questioned, as it is not a standardized and calibrated sensor. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexities of using the human eye and brain as a measurement device in scientific experiments.
  • #1
Graeme M
325
31
TL;DR Summary
Experiemental evidence suggesting the human eye can detect light as a wave but not as a particle. Further experiements needed to clarify if this contributes to some insight into the double-slit experiement and its interpretation.
Trying to wrap my head around what the double-slit experiment is illustrating, it occurred to me that one could replace a mechanical detector with the human eye. I found that this was tested with what seems an elaborate test setup in 2016, and the result suggests that while an interference pattern was detected (and hence light existing as a wave seems to be indicated), light was not detected as a particle, despite a computational simulation of experimental parameters suggesting such detection should occur. The divergence between prediction and result might suggest some discrepancy between detection results using mechanical devices and biological devices.

At least, that is what I gleaned from a quick skim through the paper. I do not find any record of this paper being discussed here, though several threads about the concept exist. Has this paper been discussed? What are your thoughts about this paper and its results?

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0147464
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Graeme M said:
Experiemental evidence suggesting the human eye can detect light as a wave but not as a particle.
I don't know where you got that idea from but it is incorrect. "Detect it as X" is poorly defined anyway. A photon is a quantum object, it is neither a wave nor a particle, although it shares some properties with both.
it occurred to me that one could replace a mechanical detector with the human eye
You can and it makes no difference. There is nothing special about a human eye.

From a brief look at the publication: What it seems to forget is the optics in the human eye.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and PeroK
  • #3
Klystron said:
Not apropos to interference or diffraction, many experiments have been conducted on human light perception. I volunteered as a human subject for a wide array of experiments while working at NASA and again at SRI International. The scientific consensus as I understand it was
See one photon if in total darkness? Possible but limited for intensity, wavelength, coherence (laser) and interference as you said.
I don't see why you would inject human subjectivity in that sort of an experiment.
How would you calibrate the eye before the test? Against what standard? A perfect FM hue 100? What age? Sex?
 
  • #5
vanhees71 said:
There was some investigation hinting at the possibility that indeed the human eye (together with the brain as a processing tool) seems to be sensitive to single photons:

https://www.nature.com/news/people-can-sense-single-photons-1.20282
I don't doubt it but eyes and brains are messy, varied, unpredictable and cannot be calibrated.
You remove all that with a standardized, calibrated, sensor that has a defined spec that everyone can agree on.
Think how easy drug research would be if we were all perfect clones?
Edit How much 'easier'...
 
Last edited:
  • #6
Sure, I also didn't get the merit in using the human eye + brain processing as a physical measurement device. I guess it's more interesting as an investigation on physiology than that.
 

1. How does the human eye act as a detector in the double-slit experiment?

The human eye acts as a detector in the double-slit experiment by capturing and processing the light that passes through the double slits. The light is then focused onto the retina, where it is converted into electrical signals that are sent to the brain for interpretation.

2. Can the human eye detect the interference pattern in the double-slit experiment?

Yes, the human eye is capable of detecting the interference pattern in the double-slit experiment. The pattern can be seen as a series of light and dark fringes on the retina, indicating the constructive and destructive interference of light waves passing through the double slits.

3. Is the human eye a reliable detector in the double-slit experiment?

The reliability of the human eye as a detector in the double-slit experiment depends on various factors such as the lighting conditions, the sensitivity of the eye, and the observer's ability to detect subtle changes in the interference pattern. In controlled laboratory settings, the human eye can be a reliable detector, but it may not be as accurate as other scientific instruments.

4. What are the limitations of using the human eye as a detector in the double-slit experiment?

One of the main limitations of using the human eye as a detector in the double-slit experiment is its limited sensitivity to low light levels. This can make it challenging to observe the interference pattern in dimly lit environments. Additionally, the human eye can also introduce errors due to factors such as fatigue, bias, and individual differences in perception.

5. Can other detectors be used instead of the human eye in the double-slit experiment?

Yes, other detectors such as photodiodes, photomultiplier tubes, and CCD cameras can be used in the double-slit experiment to measure the interference pattern with greater precision and accuracy. These detectors are specifically designed for detecting and measuring light, making them more suitable for scientific experiments compared to the human eye.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Physics
Replies
18
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
783
Replies
3
Views
785
Replies
32
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
Replies
60
Views
3K
  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
49
Views
3K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
521
Back
Top