Single-Particle Interference for BIG objects-what does it mean for a lay person?

  • Thread starter Viva-Diva
  • Start date
  • #51
1,256
2
Ok Anonym, as I can see you are more interrested in sociology than in physics.
 
  • #52
20
0
You forget that you ask to explain the content of the paper published in PRL, October 2006. It is the frontier of the modern physics.
.


Wow that makes me happy as I fished out that paper even though I am not a science person. Did you know about this paper already before?
 
  • #53
OOO
304
0
Ok Anonym, as I can see you are more interrested in sociology than in physics.

Don't worry, our beloved friend likes to pretend that he's some sort of bhuddistic monk or something. But mumbling incoherently is not the same as knowing.
 
  • #54
451
0
Wow that makes me happy as I fished out that paper even though I am not a science person. Did you know about this paper already before?

No. Thank you. I consider the paper masterpiece. If it is correct, it is Nobel Prize level.

Regards, Dany.
 
  • #55
20
0
Wow! I feel so happy!!

(But then if it is on Nobel Prize value.....why weren't you aware of it? Being a scientist, don't you keep track of latest litrature? :-p)
 
  • #56
451
0
why weren't you aware of it? Being a scientist, don't you keep track of latest litrature?

I try. My research interests now in the relativistic QM and the measurement theory (information). I missed it. A posteriori it is obvious that we should look on fluids first of all. They describe also something totally unexpected and I should return to study hydrodynamics. However, it is better late than never.

Regards, Dany.
 
  • #57
1,256
2
I try. My research interests now in the relativistic QM and the measurement theory (information). I missed it. A posteriori it is obvious that we should look on fluids first of all. They describe also something totally unexpected and I should return to study hydrodynamics. However, it is better late than never.

I generally advise people to go back to the basics, and I apply that to myself too.
Practically this means for me a collection of reference books.
I specially like the Landau & Lifchitz series that I read several time in detail during my engineering hobby time.
Other books are Jackson, gravitation by MTW, Weinberg, ...

Twenty years ago I read the collection of papers in "Quantum theory and Measurement" edited by Wheeler.
I wonder how much this subject has evolved since then on the theoretical side.
The experimental side has confirmed QM in more and more details.

Great problems need great people or time ... unless one just understand there is no problem at all.
(Landau QM chap 7)
 
Last edited:
  • #58
451
0
I specially like the Landau & Lifchitz series that I read several time in detail during my engineering hobby time.Other books are Jackson, gravitation by MTW, Weinberg, ...
Twenty years ago I read the collection of papers in "Quantum theory and Measurement" edited by Wheeler.

I remember, you already told me that few months ago.

This is actually the point of view developped by Landau & Lifchitz in the introductory chapter 7 of "Quantum mechanics".

Par.7. L.D. presented John von Neumann theory of measurements (on fingers as he usually liked to do). Eq. (7.1) is the original J. v. Neumann assumption and it is wrong. L.D. ignored that J. v. Neumann used the standard math method Reductio ad absurdum. It was further discussed in details by F.London and E.Bauer, W&Z, p.217.

By the way, L.D. didn’t write hydrodynamics. His student V.G. Levich wrote it. That book I should read again.

Regards, Dany.
 
  • #59
4
0
Can anyone help me with this? If so, please do. If you have a paper or text to point me to, that would be great. Here goes: When a double slit experiment with respect to single particle interference is conducted, and only one particle is emitted for the entire event, what is the observed result that suggests that a single particle has interfered with itself?
 
  • #60
DrChinese
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,504
1,328
Can anyone help me with this? If so, please do. If you have a paper or text to point me to, that would be great. Here goes: When a double slit experiment with respect to single particle interference is conducted, and only one particle is emitted for the entire event, what is the observed result that suggests that a single particle has interfered with itself?

Welcome to PhysicsForums, LinJieFu!

Generally, you cannot conclude there is self-interference from a single observation. There will be a dispersion pattern over a sufficiently large number of events which indicates this result.
 

Related Threads on Single-Particle Interference for BIG objects-what does it mean for a lay person?

Replies
28
Views
6K
  • Last Post
4
Replies
86
Views
16K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
7K
Replies
17
Views
1K
Replies
22
Views
4K
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
530
Top