Send the measurement device through a double slit

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the implications of performing double slit experiments with complex measurement devices, such as large molecules or viruses, and how this relates to interpretations of quantum mechanics (QM). Participants explore the conditions under which interference patterns are affected by the presence of which-path information and the role of observers in these scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that if a measurement device can store information about which slit it passes through, this interaction would destroy the interference pattern.
  • Others propose that large objects could still display two-slit interference if which-slit information is not encoded into them.
  • Several participants raise hypothetical scenarios regarding the erasure of information, questioning how this might affect the outcome of the experiment.
  • One participant notes that in experiments with C70, the emission of thermal photons was shown to destroy the interference pattern, indicating that decoherence occurs quickly with larger apparatuses.
  • Another participant cites Časlav Brukner's assertion that any increase in partial information about a particle's path correlates with a loss of visibility of the interference pattern, regardless of whether the information is read out.
  • It is discussed that the presence of information in the environment that could allow for which-path determination leads to the disappearance of interference, independent of observation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the role of information and observation in double slit experiments, and the discussion remains unresolved with no consensus reached.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations related to the assumptions about the nature of measurement devices, the conditions under which information is considered erased, and the implications of decoherence in large systems.

greypilgrim
Messages
583
Reaction score
44
Hi.

Double slit experiments are being performed successfully with increasingly large molecules. Some physicists (e.g. Anton Zeilinger) believe it might work with viruses as well. Assuming it works with a system that qualifies as a measurement device (be it a virus or something else complex enough), this looks like a Wigner's friend kind of situation. Would this rule out some interpretations of QM?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jfizzix
Physics news on Phys.org
This is a very interesting question, to say the least:)

If an object is sophisticated enough that it can store information about which slit it passes through, the act or capability of acquiring this information requires an interaction with the slit, which is essentially the same as if a measurement device was placed on the slit. The interaction itself destroys the interference pattern.

Large objects should be able to display two-slit interference, so long as which-slit information cannot be encoded into the object.
 
Some further thoughts:
  • What if the information is erased later, as in a delayed choice experiment?
  • What if the information is not erased, but there's no possible way for outside observers to check it?
  • What if there is a way, but the outside observer only decides not to check the information?
 
greypilgrim said:
Some further thoughts:
  • What if the information is erased later, as in a delayed choice experiment?
  • What if the information is not erased, but there's no possible way for outside observers to check it?
  • What if there is a way, but the outside observer only decides not to check the information?
In one experiment with C70, they showed that the emission of thermal photons destroys the interference pattern. Outside observers are not necessary. Any apparatus big enough to record which-way information would most certainly decohere very quickly.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jfizzix
As stated by Časlav Brukner in "Elegance and Enigma, The Quantum Interviews" (edited by Maximilian Schlosshauer):

"... any increase of partial information about the particle’s path will always mean a corresponding loss in visibility of the interference pattern, and vice versa. Most importantly, it is not relevant whether we read out that information. All that is necessary is for the information to be present somewhere in the universe."
 
greypilgrim said:
Some further thoughts:
  • What if the information is not erased, but there's no possible way for outside observers to check it?
  • What if there is a way, but the outside observer only decides not to check the information?

It matters whether information is passed to the environment that could, in principle, allow which path to be determined. We know interference disappears if that occurs, even without anyone looking at it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K