Can recording the dual slit experiment affect future outcomes?

[maquick]

I am familiar with the dual slit experiment up to the point where measuring at one slit made the interference pattern collapse.

My question is has anyone tried using a sensor of some kind that has no memory or output? Does the observer have to be sentient? I have a feeling someone has.

If an observer has to be sentient, i assume a device that records to be read later would destroy the pattern also. I theorize that what actually happens is the observation causes the probability to collapse backward in time. We wouldn't notice it of course since it already happened to us...

Ok, assuming all this is true. What happens when you record the slit onto media that you later have an independent 50/50 chance of completely destroying or observing? Would we actually know the future of the later 50/50 chance by observing the pattern made at the time of measurement? If this is it true could it be taken in further? As in if Obama is relected we open the file, if he isn't we destroy it.

I'm pretty sure my chain of logic collapsed at some point. Paradoxes abound. Something simpler like it will rain next tuesday may work since it's beyond our control.

Please know that I have only a high school knowledge of physics and some light independent research into theory. I can comprehend something existing as a probability, including multiple dimensions stopping time paradoxes. I can also think about schrodingers(sp.) cat without crying. That's about it though.

This is just stuff I think about. When I try to talk to people about this just smile nod and back away usually. Hopefully you can help set me straight.

 

[vish_al210]

Hello Maquick. Well I understand part of your question, don't understand how you relate it to prophecising, and well based on a series of events u cannot predict the next event as real life is a very complex equation in which factors keep popping in and out.
I guess u can use sensors to measure... but have missed the objective of your post...
Do let me know more...

 

[maquick]

Sorry about that. I am in no ways a scientist. I got to rambling there.

The question I started out thinking of when I went off into some back to the future tangent is this. One the things I got from the dual split experiment was that observation changes reality on a subatomic level.

Does it matter if the observer is sentient?
Can it be a sensor of some kind with no output, or a cat for that matter?
Why doesn't Schrödinger's cat observe the gas coming out and therefore die on the spot?

There I managed three somewhat concise questions which I hope are more readily answerable.

 

[vish_al210]

Maquick, I think the problem is that for one to measure something one has to feel it. When we place an ammeter in series in a circuit to measure the current, the very negligible resistance of the ammeter imposes a minor current change in the circuit. BUt in comparision to the actual measured current this value is very negligible but 'is.
Likewise to measure the passage of the electron through the slit one would need to measure the effect of the electron on the slit to identify if it passed. One needs to feel the electron or its effect in order to identify/sense it. And while sensing, one does (invariably) alter the measurement by taking a slice of its offing.
In you consider a photodetector, after light inpinging on the photo detector, one measures the quanta or value of certain of its parameters, but in measuring one absorbs the energy or part of it, after that the remainder is reflected back, but the energy that was measured was consumed and transformed into heat//current//voltage.
And if are considering something as feeble as an electron, how does one measure its passage without drawing part of its energy. I guess, the right way to conduct the experiment would be to change the screen/wall with each shot of electron, then superimpose the screens. The reason to change the screen is to see if actually there is any instance in time when there are two places that the electron is observed on the screen.. well if not then concept of the electron passing through the slit//interfering with its motion etc can be rejected. Also When the electron passes through the slit, wouldn't it charge or alter the properties of the slit itself, wouldn't that be a factor.