Recent content by Philip Van Hoof

Aha, so the 'particle' goes through both holes, creates the wave behavior on both sides, and that results in 'self' interference caused by the two waves. No 'recording' needed for that nor resetting by the measurement apparatus, indeed. Ok, I think I get it. Time for me to go to the next...

Is it the case that the interference gets reset when the light source in Fig. 1-4 of 1.6 gets turned on (when a measurement is made)? I understand this answer as the interference being recorded (a 'wave' that somehow keeps existing between the hole and the backstop) as apparently the time...

Doesn't a polarizer already assume the 'particle' to be a wave? Isn't that a problem when we're trying to measure wave vs. particle behavior? It ignores 50% of the possibilities :-) But I agree it's an interesting experiment in the paper.

As an engineer I was interested in the setup of the experiment described in '1-6 Watching the electrons' of Feynman's recently published lectures. I understand that a method that is used to detect whether the 'particle' passes through hole 1 or 2 is to use a wave of a wavelength that is either...