Double-slit experiment with magnets and iron projectiles

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility and expected outcomes of a double-slit experiment using round magnetic projectiles, such as iron ball-bearings, instead of traditional particles like photons or electrons. Participants explore the implications of using magnets and the potential for observing interference patterns, as well as the theoretical underpinnings of such an experiment.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Experimental/applied

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express uncertainty about whether an interference pattern would emerge from magnetic projectiles, questioning the wave-like behavior of such objects.
  • Others argue that the projectiles would behave as particles, suggesting that any observed pattern would not resemble traditional interference patterns seen with waves.
  • One participant references the Aharonov-Bohm effect, prompting a discussion about its applicability to magnetic objects and whether it could lead to interference effects.
  • Concerns are raised about the dependence of results on the DeBroglie wavelength of the projectiles, with suggestions that this could determine the visibility of quantum effects.
  • There is speculation about the impact of varying the strength of the magnets on the experimental outcomes, with some suggesting it may influence the results while others caution that the DeBroglie wavelength is a more critical factor.
  • A participant questions the durability of the experimental apparatus given the mass of the projectiles and their potential impacts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether an interference pattern would be observed. There are multiple competing views regarding the behavior of magnetic projectiles in the context of the double-slit experiment, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations related to the assumptions about the nature of the projectiles, the role of magnetic fields, and the conditions under which quantum effects may or may not be observed.

atomistic
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I am not sure if this kind of experiment has been performed before. If so, great, I would love to see the results. Anyway, here goes.

The double-slit experiments with photons, electrons and even http://hexagon.physics.wisc.edu/teaching/2010s%20ph531%20quantum%20mechanics/interesting%20papers/zeilinger%20large%20molecule%20interference%20ajp%202003.pdf" all display the characteristic interference patterns associated with waves. I am really interested to know what the pattern will be like if we where to generate the following setup.

Experimental setup:
1) Projectiles = round magnetic objects of same shape, size and mass and speed (e.g. iron ball-bearings)
2) A single slit and a double slit composed of magnets with equal "strength" (see figure)
Experiment.png

and
Experiment 2.png


Can it be done, has it been done and what are the results like or what do you think the results will be like?

Thank you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
They will be particles, with trajectory changed by the magnets. What are you trying to ask?
 
Bloodthunder said:
They will be particles, with trajectory changed by the magnets. What are you trying to ask?
I just want to know what the pattern would look like after the particles pass through the slits. An interference pattern of some sort or not?
 
Why would there be an interference pattern? There aren't any waves to speak of.
 
I just think it would be interesting to have experimental/empirical results for this kind of experiment. I don't know what to expect honestly, regardless of the fact that magnetic balls are not waves. What do you expect to see bloodthunder?
 
Well, I feel all you would see is probably just particles going through a slit, with the "intensities" on the other side corresponding to the number of slits, with the slits probably being slightly wider due to their trajectory being slightly shifted.
So... what is your purpose of experimentation? What are you trying to show?
 
Check out the Aharonov-Bohm effect...
 
You will see no interference effects with macroscopic objects like those described, only
their 'particle' nature can be observed.
 
DrFurious said:
Check out the Aharonov-Bohm effect...
Thanks. If I understand it correctly, the Aharonov-Bohm effect applies to electrically charged particles. Do you think an interference pattern will emerge if you replace it with "round magnetic objects of same shape, size and mass and speed"?
 
  • #10
atomistic said:
Thanks. If I understand it correctly, the Aharonov-Bohm effect applies to electrically charged particles. Do you think an interference pattern will emerge if you replace it with "round magnetic objects of same shape, size and mass and speed"?

Would be fun to try. Although make sure you calculate the DeBroglie wavelength of whatever you're trying to shoot through the slits. That will tell you whether you're apt to see quantum effects or not.
 
  • #11
DrFurious said:
Would be fun to try. Although make sure you calculate the DeBroglie wavelength of whatever you're trying to shoot through the slits. That will tell you whether you're apt to see quantum effects or not.
Changing the strength of the magnets are also likely to play a role right?
 
  • #12
atomistic said:
Changing the strength of the magnets are also likely to play a role right?

Doesn't matter how strong your magnets are if the DeBroglie wavelength is too large. But you might get some different effects from higher field strengths (NMR, for example). Then again, the SQUID device works in extremely low fields. Thats almost what you drew.
 
  • #13
Assuming that this experiment is somewhat velocity dependent(not sure), I wonder if the experimental apparatus itself could survive the mass impacts to produce results.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
9K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
5K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K