- #1
Thedavui
- 7
- 0
Are there any actual experiments that have been made where it has established if the naked eye can kill the interference pattern on the detector screen in the double slit experiment, that is, can the naked eye somehow function as a detector in this experiement? Let me give an example to clarify my point.
Consider one double slit experiment (E1) that results in an interference pattern on the detector screen behind. The experiment E1 has the following properties. E1(a): E1 is performed in an enclosed room with no communication being able to pass in or out. E1(b) There is only technical equipment in the room where the experiment E1 is conducted, no humans or other sentient beings. E1(c): E1 produces an interference pattern on the detector screen.
Now consider another double slit experiment E2. E2 is equivalent in E1 in every way, with 2 exceptions, there is a human in the same room looking at a certain aspect of the experiment and the experiment does not produce an interference pattern on the detector screen. So the conditions for E2 would be: E2(d): E2 is performed in an enclosed room with no communication being able to pass in or out. E2(e) There is only technical equipment in the room where the experiment E2 is conducted AND one human being looking at a certain aspect of the expriment, but not interfering in any other way. E2(f): E2 does NOT produce an interference pattern on the detector screen.
Is it possible to set up the 2 experiments E1 and E2 so that they completely comply with the conditions above? That is, can E1 and E2(d) & E2(e) be set up in a way so that the following implication is possible:
E1(a)=true & E1(b)=true & E1(c)=true & E2(d) =true & E2(e) =true ======> E2(f)
To summerize, my question is the following: Can the outcome of the double slit experiment (interference pattern or not) be changed by adding a human observer to the scenario whose vision is directed on a certain aspect of the experiment but not making any other changes in the experimental setup.
If you have the answer, kindly provide references to actual experiments that have been published and peer-reviewed.
Consider one double slit experiment (E1) that results in an interference pattern on the detector screen behind. The experiment E1 has the following properties. E1(a): E1 is performed in an enclosed room with no communication being able to pass in or out. E1(b) There is only technical equipment in the room where the experiment E1 is conducted, no humans or other sentient beings. E1(c): E1 produces an interference pattern on the detector screen.
Now consider another double slit experiment E2. E2 is equivalent in E1 in every way, with 2 exceptions, there is a human in the same room looking at a certain aspect of the experiment and the experiment does not produce an interference pattern on the detector screen. So the conditions for E2 would be: E2(d): E2 is performed in an enclosed room with no communication being able to pass in or out. E2(e) There is only technical equipment in the room where the experiment E2 is conducted AND one human being looking at a certain aspect of the expriment, but not interfering in any other way. E2(f): E2 does NOT produce an interference pattern on the detector screen.
Is it possible to set up the 2 experiments E1 and E2 so that they completely comply with the conditions above? That is, can E1 and E2(d) & E2(e) be set up in a way so that the following implication is possible:
E1(a)=true & E1(b)=true & E1(c)=true & E2(d) =true & E2(e) =true ======> E2(f)
To summerize, my question is the following: Can the outcome of the double slit experiment (interference pattern or not) be changed by adding a human observer to the scenario whose vision is directed on a certain aspect of the experiment but not making any other changes in the experimental setup.
If you have the answer, kindly provide references to actual experiments that have been published and peer-reviewed.