High School The Human Eye as a Detector in Double-Slit Experiment

[Graeme M]

TL;DR

Experiemental evidence suggesting the human eye can detect light as a wave but not as a particle. Further experiements needed to clarify if this contributes to some insight into the double-slit experiement and its interpretation.

Trying to wrap my head around what the double-slit experiment is illustrating, it occurred to me that one could replace a mechanical detector with the human eye. I found that this was tested with what seems an elaborate test setup in 2016, and the result suggests that while an interference pattern was detected (and hence light existing as a wave seems to be indicated), light was not detected as a particle, despite a computational simulation of experimental parameters suggesting such detection should occur. The divergence between prediction and result might suggest some discrepancy between detection results using mechanical devices and biological devices.

At least, that is what I gleaned from a quick skim through the paper. I do not find any record of this paper being discussed here, though several threads about the concept exist. Has this paper been discussed? What are your thoughts about this paper and its results?

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0147464

 

[mfb]

Experiemental evidence suggesting the human eye can detect light as a wave but not as a particle.

I don't know where you got that idea from but it is incorrect. "Detect it as X" is poorly defined anyway. A photon is a quantum object, it is neither a wave nor a particle, although it shares some properties with both.

it occurred to me that one could replace a mechanical detector with the human eye

You can and it makes no difference. There is nothing special about a human eye.

From a brief look at the publication: What it seems to forget is the optics in the human eye.

 

[pinball1970]

Not apropos to interference or diffraction, many experiments have been conducted on human light perception. I volunteered as a human subject for a wide array of experiments while working at NASA and again at SRI International. The scientific consensus as I understand it was

See one photon if in total darkness? Possible but limited for intensity, wavelength, coherence (laser) and interference as you said.
I don't see why you would inject human subjectivity in that sort of an experiment.
How would you calibrate the eye before the test? Against what standard? A perfect FM hue 100? What age? Sex?

 

[vanhees71]

There was some investigation hinting at the possibility that indeed the human eye (together with the brain as a processing tool) seems to be sensitive to single photons:

https://www.nature.com/news/people-can-sense-single-photons-1.20282

 

[pinball1970]

There was some investigation hinting at the possibility that indeed the human eye (together with the brain as a processing tool) seems to be sensitive to single photons:

https://www.nature.com/news/people-can-sense-single-photons-1.20282

I don't doubt it but eyes and brains are messy, varied, unpredictable and cannot be calibrated.
You remove all that with a standardized, calibrated, sensor that has a defined spec that everyone can agree on.
Think how easy drug research would be if we were all perfect clones?
Edit How much 'easier'...

 

[vanhees71]

Sure, I also didn't get the merit in using the human eye + brain processing as a physical measurement device. I guess it's more interesting as an investigation on physiology than that.