Could observation determine the existence of mass in particles?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nick Saik
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mass Observation
Nick Saik
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I'm thinking about the two slit experiement. When you place detectors in front of the slits, the single photon of light behaves as if it has mass. But when you take the detectors away, the photon behaves as if it doesn't have mass.

Could observation impart mass? Could the higgs boson particle be observation?

We are looking at a such a small scale, that the very act of looking alters the action. A single photon of light only behaves like it has mass when we are watching it, because in order to "watch something" it has to have mass.

When we look away, the particle has no mass, because it doesn't need to have mass to be perceived.

We are looking for the Higgs Boson particle, but what if in a way, "looking" is the particle?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Nick Saik said:
I'm thinking about the two slit experiement. When you place detectors in front of the slits, the single photon of light behaves as if it has mass.

Welcome to PhysicsForums, Nick!

Photons have no more mass (or momentum) from one observational arrangement than another. So no, the idea you suggest does not really fly. You might want to read up on the double slit a little more. This effect is due to "which path" information.
 
DrChinese said:
Welcome to PhysicsForums, Nick!

Photons have no more mass (or momentum) from one observational arrangement than another. So no, the idea you suggest does not really fly. You might want to read up on the double slit a little more. This effect is due to "which path" information.



What would be the best evidence/experiment confirming the above statement and how certain is it? I've encountered it many times here and elsewhere on the net and genuinely wonder if it's true, as it would require a conscious, perceiving observer(information is only related to mind in this reality).
 
Nick Saik said:
I'm thinking about the two slit experiement. When you place detectors in front of the slits, the single photon of light behaves as if it has mass. But when you take the detectors away, the photon behaves as if it doesn't have mass.

Could observation impart mass? Could the higgs boson particle be observation?

We are looking at a such a small scale, that the very act of looking alters the action. A single photon of light only behaves like it has mass when we are watching it, because in order to "watch something" it has to have mass.

When we look away, the particle has no mass, because it doesn't need to have mass to be perceived.

We are looking for the Higgs Boson particle, but what if in a way, "looking" is the particle?

Photons have no mass. None of what you described here has any indication of photons having mass.

Please start by reading the FAQ in the General Physics forum.

Zz.
 
Maui, I don't understand what you mean by saying a photon acts like it has mass. Do you mean that it acts like a particle when the detectors are there, and like a wave when they are not? If you have a link to a reference, feel free to send it to me via private message, as I don't think it belongs here on a thread seeing as how it really seems incorrect.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top