Quantum double slits moving past a quantum particle?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Leopolitan
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Particle Quantum
Leopolitan
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
Relative double slit experiment
Open question: Can we be sure that a quantum model double slit doesn't create a carrier interference pattern around the slits, in the fields, already there? Relativity is such a big deal in physics but so many models only consider seemingly weird quantum particles going through normal classical slits. Maybe things make more sense when we imagine quantum slits moving toward a quantum particle and vice versa. Let's think relatively!
 
  • Skeptical
Likes PeroK
Physics news on Phys.org
Leopolitan said:
Can we be sure that a quantum model double slit doesn't create a carrier interference pattern around the slits

What does "a carrier interference pattern" mean?

Leopolitan said:
Maybe things make more sense when we imagine quantum slits moving toward a quantum particle

What difference would "quantum slits" make?

Do you have a reference for a model that has any of these features? Or are you just making it up? Personal speculation is not allowed here.
 
Sorry, getting used to the rules. The paper below discusses pilot carrier waves in terms of hydrodynamics.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343581035_Hydrodynamic_Quantum_Field_Theory_The_Onset_of_Particle_Motion_and_the_Form_of_the_Pilot_Wave

I see your point about wanton speculation. Where does one raise such discussions without ending up talking to metaphysical types?
 
Leopolitan said:
The paper below discusses pilot carrier waves in terms of hydrodynamics.

"Hydrodynamics" here means "hydrodynamic quantum theory", which is more or less a version of Bohmian mechanics. So this thread really belongs in the interpretations forum, and I will move it.

Leopolitan said:
Where does one raise such discussions without ending up talking to metaphysical types?

QM interpretations can be discussed in the interpretations forum (where this thread will be moved in a moment).

Personal speculation cannot be discussed anywhere on PF.
 
Moderator's note: Thread moved to QM interpretations forum.
 
Leopolitan said:
Can we be sure that a quantum model double slit doesn't create a carrier interference pattern around the slits, in the fields, already there?

If hydrodynamic quantum theory is just an alternative interpretation of QM, which is what it appears to be (it doesn't change any of the experimental predictions, it just tells a different story about what is going on behind the scenes, so to speak), then there is no way to experimentally test it against other interpretations, since all interpretations make the same experimental predictions.
 
I understand that the world of interpretations of quantum mechanics is very complex, as experimental data hasn't completely falsified the main deterministic interpretations (such as Everett), vs non-deterministc ones, however, I read in online sources that Objective Collapse theories are being increasingly challenged. Does this mean that deterministic interpretations are more likely to be true? I always understood that the "collapse" or "measurement problem" was how we phrased the fact that...
I would like to know the validity of the following criticism of one of Zeilinger's latest papers https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2507.07756 "violation of bell inequality with unentangled photons" The review is by Francis Villatoro, in Spanish, https://francis.naukas.com/2025/07/26/sin-entrelazamiento-no-se-pueden-incumplir-las-desigualdades-de-bell/ I will translate and summarize the criticism as follows: -It is true that a Bell inequality is violated, but not a CHSH inequality. The...
I keep reading throughout this forum from many members that the general motivation for finding a deeper explanation within QM, specifically with regards to quantum entanglement, is due to an inability to grasp reality based off of classical intuitions. On the other hand, if QM was truly incomplete, and there was a deeper explanation that we haven't grasped yet that would explain why particles tend to be correlated to each other seemingly instantly despite vast separated distances, then that...
Back
Top