How Does the Double Slit Experiment Show Both Particle and Wave Behaviors?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the double slit experiment and its implications for understanding the dual particle-wave nature of electrons and photons. Participants explore the conditions under which interference patterns emerge and the role of observation in quantum mechanics, touching on concepts such as wave function collapse and the observer effect.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that observing electrons as they pass through the slits collapses their wave function, leading to particle-like behavior and a distinct two-slit pattern on the screen.
  • Others argue that when a beam of electrons is shot through the slits without measuring which slit they pass through, an interference pattern emerges, indicating wave-like behavior.
  • A participant questions the logic of measuring which slit an electron goes through, suggesting that such measurement must disturb the system and eliminate the interference pattern.
  • Some participants clarify that "observation" refers specifically to measuring the path of the electrons, and that simply observing the overall experiment does not affect the interference pattern.
  • There is mention of the de Broglie relation and the uncertainty principle as tools to analyze the wave nature of electrons and the conditions under which it is lost.
  • Participants express confusion about the relationship between observation and the emergence of interference patterns, particularly in reference to high school experiments with laser beams.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the implications of observation in the double slit experiment. Multiple competing views remain regarding how observation affects the wave-particle duality and the conditions necessary for interference patterns to form.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in understanding arise from the complexity of quantum mechanics, particularly regarding the definitions of observation and measurement, and the nuances of wave function collapse. Some assumptions about the nature of measurement and its effects on quantum systems are not fully articulated.

dawningparadox
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
From my shallow understanding, when we shoot a small amount of electrons through the slits while observing, the observation interfere with the electrons and the quantum system and thus collapse the wave function, making the electrons behave like a particle and form a 2-slit pattern on the screen. However, why would we still see an interference pattern aka electrons acting like a wave when we shoot a whole beam through the slits like we did in high school? Aren't we still observing the beam going through the slit? Why would the system not collapse?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
dawningparadox said:
From my shallow understanding, when we shoot a small amount of electrons through the slits while observing, the observation interfere with the electrons and the quantum system and thus collapse the wave function, making the electrons behave like a particle and form a 2-slit pattern on the screen.

"observation interfere with the electrons and the quantum system " pl. explain clearly

"making the electrons behave like a particle and form a 2-slit pattern on the screen"
i understand that wave nature leads to interference.
 
"Observing" here meaning to measure or detect through which slit the electron went.
If you do this (by putting detectors at each slit, for example) you destroy the interference pattern. The fact that someone is there "observing" the experiment is irrelevant. You cannot tell through what slit a specific electron goes. It does not matter if you keep your eyes open or closed. :)
 
nasu said:
Observing" here meaning to measure or detect through which slit the electron went.
If you do this (by putting detectors at each slit, for example) you destroy the interference pattern.

Is it not logical as 'waves' interfere and give rise to a pattern -e.g. photons the light waves produce interference-
and as soon as you destroy the wave character by measuring 'electrons' as particles - must have disturbed the waves so -no interference pattern is there;
i am just asking why you wish to know 'through which slit' an electron went through?
If you know it then you must have used some device to gain information and the 'interaction" with the device must have changed the state of electrons!
 
I did not say that you destroy the wave character. Whatever that means.
Yes, this is what I said, you must use a device.
I don't really understand what are you asking and why. I was replying to the question in OP.
 
dawningparadox said:
However, why would we still see an interference pattern aka electrons acting like a wave when we shoot a whole beam through the slits like we did in high school? Aren't we still observing the beam going through the slit? Why would the system not collapse?

If you refer to electron beam in which a stream of electrons thousands per sec going through the slits you get an interference pattern- i think if undisturbed electrons behave like waves - using de broglie relation you can calculate the wavelength also which depends on the momentum of electrons- so this interference is due to wave nature of electrons.-
your earlier question is why the wave nature is lost when you catch the electrons and label them individually that 'this one went through the slit-1 and this other one went through slit -2... by doing such measurements the particle nature comes to the foreground and wave nature gets lost.
if you have some intro in QM-you can analyse it further using uncertainty principle.
 
drvrm said:
If you refer to electron beam in which a stream of electrons thousands per sec going through the slits you get an interference pattern- i think if undisturbed electrons behave like waves - using de broglie relation you can calculate the wavelength also which depends on the momentum of electrons- so this interference is due to wave nature of electrons.-
your earlier question is why the wave nature is lost when you catch the electrons and label them individually that 'this one went through the slit-1 and this other one went through slit -2... by doing such measurements the particle nature comes to the foreground and wave nature gets lost.
if you have some intro in QM-you can analyse it further using uncertainty principle.
Sorry for the ambiguity in my question. I underdtand the observer effect. What I really was asking in my initial post is that why do the double slit experiment we did in high school - remember when we shot a laser beam through the slits and we could see a clear interference pattern forming on the wall - not correspond with the observer effect? Like technically when we were doing those rudimentary experiemnts we were still observing the whole process right? Why do we still see an interference pattern on the wall rather than a 2 slit pattern?
 
dawningparadox said:
Sorry for the ambiguity in my question. I underdtand the observer effect. What I really was asking in my initial post is that why do the double slit experiment we did in high school - remember when we shot a laser beam through the slits and we could see a clear interference pattern forming on the wall - not correspond with the observer effect? Like technically when we were doing those rudimentary experiemnts we were still observing the whole process right? Why do we still see an interference pattern on the wall rather than a 2 slit pattern?

Because you aren't observing the photons in a way that tells you which slit they went through. You're simply seeing them after they reflect from the wall or screen after the slits.
 
Drakkith said:
Because you aren't observing the photons in a way that tells you which slit they went through. You're simply seeing them after they reflect from the wall or screen after the slits.

Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
971
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
9K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K