The Double Slit Experiment & its Connection to Pseudoscience

[EAPB]

The Double Slit Experiment & its Connection to "Pseudoscience"

Introduction

Hello everyone :), thank you for taking the time to view this as I have ALOT of questions regarding The Double Slit experiment and its connection to "The Law of Attraction" (LOA) or what many call pseudoscience. I have done a fair amount of homework on this subject before posting here, and I already understand that in no way shape or form does Quantum Physics verify the LoA. However, after doing my fair share of research, I do think it is a fair leap in logic to assume that it might be possible. Furthermore, I am posting here because I have seriously exhausted all other options. With that said, I hope you guys/girls who are all WAY smarter than me can assist in this dilemma.

My Dilemma

Now, after watching the countless videos on this experiment, and reading about it, I have come to a few forks in the road with logic and reasoning.

1. The "observer effect" (the idea that unless someone is observing something, the world operates in waves of infinite possibility) is not real in the laymen sense. The observer effect comes into play when you try to measure anything. In this case the detector, which is shining a focused beam at the electrons causing them collapse, which makes them operate like particles rather than waves.

-HOWEVER, during this experiment, when the detector was detecting the electrons, it was only registering the electrons coming through the upper slit, NOT the bottom slit. That means their should have been an interference pattern at least on the bottom slit? No? My other conundrum with this is experiment also has to deal with the detector itself. It uses beams of light from my understanding, so what type of effect would a lamp or simply a light bulb have on this experiment? Moreover, if the detector was NOT on and people were simply observing, not measuring, how would the electrons operate?


OR (the other side of the coin)

2. The observer effect is very real, and simply through trying to observe the electrons did these particles give us the result initially expected. This would mean that our expectations actually influence the experiment.

With that said, has this experiment ever been done with a baby in the room? Since a baby has no expectations would that affect the experiment in any way? What about an animal?



For anyone with some answers, it is greatly appreciated. I truly admire the intellect i found on this forum when i was chasing answers down the rabbit hole. Also, for anyone that is completely dismissive of the idea that the observers expectations influence experiments, i found this article with john wheeler, a colleague of Einstein who seems to truly believe in the observer effect, and takes it to a whole other level. http://discovermagazine.com/2002/jun/featuniverse#.Ud5qavm1F8G


NOTE: I am not well versed in QM, so the simpler the better. Also, I would like to steer away from this discussion being about how "dumb" the law of attraction is. I've studied it for quite some time, and it goes much deeper than simply manifesting wealth. In fact, that is only 5% of what it actually entails.


Thanks for whatever light can be shed on this murky topic for me. Being able to talk to minds much brighter than myself on this subject is a treat within itself :).

 

[micromass]

You can use this thread to ask questions about the double slit experiment and about quantum mechanics. But pseudoscience such as the law of attraction is not allowed on this forum. So we're not going to discuss it in this thread.

 

[Nugatory]

Also, for anyone that is completely dismissive of the idea that the observers expectations influence experiments, i found this article with john wheeler, a colleague of Einstein who seems to truly believe in the observer effect, and takes it to a whole other level. http://discovermagazine.com/2002/jun/featuniverse#.Ud5qavm1F8G

"Discover magazine says Wheeler believes" and "Wheeler believes" are different things.

 

[bhobba]

The "observer effect" (the idea that unless someone is observing something, the world operates in waves of infinite possibility) is not real in the laymen sense.

First thing you need to understand is a semantic confusion that sometimes arises where in QM because the word observation is used some think that implies an actual observer. Its not like that at all. An observation is when a quantum process makes its appearance here in the common sense classical macro world. In the double slit experiment its where a flash happens on the screen or a mark appears on the photographic plate. That happens regardless of if anyone looks at it or not.

I think it would be worthwhile for you to read about it again bearing that in mind.

Thanks
Bill

 

[micromass]

Please don't make any posts about the Law Of Attraction here. This thread is for discussion of QM only.