Italian double slit electron experiment

[DarioC]

Since my ability to respond to articles was messed up by someone and I have been unable to get any help straightening out the problem I wish to comment on the article here.

I have always thought it more than a bit unusual that anyone would consider it "strange" that EM radiation, particles, etc. behavior would be affected when a detector is used to detect/observe, whatever, any part of the radiation. It is the detector itself that causes the effect IMHO, not whether anyone ever KNOWS which way the photon/electron goes. If you interfere with the particle/wave with a physical device it is going to change the behavior of the particle. I find that perfectly logical.

Admittedly there are some really strange things that happen concerning prediction before the fact with other double slit/detector or light splitter experiments.

The single-particle-at-a-time interference strikes me as something that might be (perhaps has been) studied in reference to the restrictions one finds on the size of the slits and their separation in order for the experiment to work. That is something you will find if you try a double slit experiment yourself.

Speaking of that: A nice functional double slit can be made by securing a sewing needle between the edges of two of the little (6 inch) metal machinist rulers ("scales") on a piece of thin cardboard using tape. There is no problem with adjusting the slits as the unevenness of the ruler edges will do it automatically. In this case cheaper is better. An adequate hole in the cardboard behind the needle will let the light through.
Easy to do and works pretty good using a laser pointer as a source.

DC

 

[lightarrow]

Since my ability to respond to articles was messed up by someone and I have been unable to get any help straightening out the problem I wish to comment on the article here.

Which article?

 

[DarioC]

This one:

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-01-which-way-detector-mystery-double-slit.html

DC

 

[Deric Boyle]

I wish what you said would be true(but it is not completely though).As I've spent weeks since the time when my study to give logical explanations for quantum mechanics and to disprove certain conjectures but failed each time.
Yeah your suggestion(experimental setup) is really helpful as a study tool but don't give satisfying result.
(by the way I've used the same setup in my college project, got an A grade but not what I wanted that is I wanted to counter attack quantum mechanics but got defeated undisputedly now I'm in its favour.
for better understanding you must read Feynman lectures Vol.3 ch 1 'The Quantum behaviour'

 

[Alanine]

DarioC don't read Deric's post he has been misguiding not to you but to many.
DarioC your setup doesn't help and for the theory part advice you to go and read again about the double slit experiment at wikipedia or any Wave Optics textbook.

 

[DarioC]

I have read some on the subject, but not Feynman (except for excerpts,) yet.

I am amused that someone would think that I would try to use what amounts to a toy to attempt physics research. That is pretty funny.

Or that I am somehow trying to refute Quantum Mechanics/Theory.

My comment was more addressed to the tone of the (reviewer/author) in his initial statements than anything in the article. Exaggerated paraphrase: "The entire world is amazed that sticking a detector into a double slit experiment changes the behavior of the EM wave/particles!" Duh.

I rather liked the basic idea of the experiment, the value of which seemed to be totally missed by the commenters at the end of the article. Sneaking up on the phenomena a little at a time with subtle changes is pretty clever.

DC

PS: Don't feel too bad Deric, you are in excellent company, Albert couldn't do it either. Chuckle.

 

[lightarrow]

The novelty of the experiment, IMHO, seems to be the fact that it's been found the electron to effectively pass both slits as a wave, and that its corpuscolar behaviour (= which way if you measure it in one of the slits = no more interference pattern) is due to the loss of a relation of phase between the two waves coming out of the two slits (one free and the other with the filter).

 

[DarioC]

Good selective summary, I like it.

What I like about the experiments is that they actually measure something that gives us information as to what is happening in the details. Not like speculation that it is due to probability waves or whatever.

Perhaps I haven't read widely enough, but I find myself wondering why I have never seen anything on the equipment details of these experiments (just lots of math.) as to what kind of detectors and how they are used. Obviously they can't stick a solid state detector up in front of the particles/EM waves, so what do they use? Are we talking charge sensors of some kind for the electrons?

Any good references on the actual detectors, for example? Appreciate it.

DC

 

[wher456]

Are you thinking of ccd?
Then yes they'll work.

 

[lightarrow]

Any good references on the actual detectors, for example? Appreciate it.

http://www.google.it/url?sa=t&sourc...N-EYRnr3w&sig2=lhxWtQRjQS-xNktx65VKAA&cad=rja

 

[DarioC]

Thank you lightarrow. Great document. Just glanced at it quick but looks like the kind of information I really like to see. I have to fit it in with changing the installation of my airplane radio, and both are turning out to be time consuming. More from me later.
Thanks again,
DC