Two-slit experiment and The Truth

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter GreatBigBore
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Experiment
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The two-slit experiment demonstrates that particles, such as electrons, exhibit wave-particle duality, where they can behave as both particles and waves. When a single particle is fired, it does not create an interference pattern; this pattern only emerges after many particles are fired, indicating that the behavior of particles can be described by a wave function. The discussion emphasizes that a single particle does not interfere with itself in the traditional sense but rather that the statistical behavior of many particles reflects wave-like properties. The experiment raises questions about the nature of particles and waves, suggesting that our perception of particles may be an illusion created by wave interactions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly wave-particle duality.
  • Familiarity with the two-slit experiment and its implications in quantum physics.
  • Knowledge of wave functions and their role in describing particle behavior.
  • Basic grasp of quantum measurement and its effects on wave functions.
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the concept of wave-particle duality in greater depth through resources like "Quantum Mechanics: The Theoretical Minimum" by Leonard Susskind.
  • Investigate the mathematical formulation of wave functions in quantum mechanics.
  • Learn about the implications of quantum measurement and the collapse of the wave function.
  • Examine advanced topics such as quantum entanglement and its relation to the two-slit experiment.
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, quantum mechanics enthusiasts, and researchers interested in the foundational concepts of quantum theory and wave-particle duality.

  • #31


(Disclaimer: I’m only a layman and I could be wrong.)
edgepflow said:
For the single particle case, I was reading that the "Many Worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics suggests that an electron from "our universe" goes through one slit and an electron from a "parallel universe" goes through the other.
In the Copenhagen interpretation we have a process called http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function_collapse" , i.e. in the case of the Double-slit experiment the wave function of the photon (or electron) collapse, after interaction with an observer (measurement), to one determinate outcome, to 'explain' the observation.

In MWI there is no wave function collapse. The observer and the observed (particle) have become http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement" ; i.e. the state of the observer and the observed are correlated after the observation is made.

In MWI this means that if the observer tries to measure which slit the photon passes through, then the observer is split into observer1 that measures left slit, and observer2 that measures right slit. These two observers are now in separate worlds, and can never interact again (after the observation).

I don’t have the full understanding of MWI to explain what happens when the interfered wave hits the detector screen... Logically the observer ought to be split into every possible position that the photon can have on the screen. But that would mean no single MWI observer can ever see the full interference pattern!? (In case where photons arrive one by one) If a pro could explain this it would be great...

edgepflow said:
I wanted to try to figure out the probability density of the wave function that it goes through both slits at the same time. I think this might be called degeneracy but I am not sure. I studied basic quantum mechanics in my undergraduate engineering studies but this was awhile back. I have been reading "quantum Mechanics DeMystified" to try to get back into it (a good book for its purpose in my opinion). Maybe some others more versed in this area could give me some hints.
Well, as I understand this, the photon must go through both slits at the same time – otherwise there would not be any interference pattern...??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_dynamics_in_the_double-slit_experiment#Probability_for_a_single_photon"

"Some time before the discovery of quantum mechanics people realized that the connexion between light waves and photons must be of a statistical character. What they did not clearly realize, however, was that the wave function gives information about the probability of one photon being in a particular place and not the probable number of photons in that place. The importance of the distinction can be made clear in the following way. Suppose we have a beam of light consisting of a large number of photons split up into two components of equal intensity. On the assumption that the beam is connected with the probable number of photons in it, we should have half the total number going into each component. If the two components are now made to interfere, we should require a photon in one component to be able to interfere with one in the other. Sometimes these two photons would have to annihilate one another and other times they would have to produce four photons. This would contradict the conservation of energy. The new theory, which connects the wave function with probabilities for one photon gets over the difficulty by making each photon go partly into each of the two components. Each photon then interferes only with itself. Interference between two different photons never occurs."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_dynamics_in_the_double-slit_experiment#Probability_amplitudes"

The probability for a photon to be in a particular polarization state depends on the fields as calculated by the classical Maxwell's equations. The photon probability density of a single-photon Fock state is related to the expectation value of the energy density of the equivalent E and B fields.

Simplified version of Maxwell's equations, written in terms of either the electric field E or the magnetic field B:

\nabla^2 \mathbf{E} \ - \ { 1 \over c^2 } {\partial^2 \mathbf{E} \over \partial t^2} \ \ = \ \ 0

\nabla^2 \mathbf{B} \ - \ { 1 \over c^2 } {\partial^2 \mathbf{B} \over \partial t^2} \ \ = \ \ 0

where c is the speed of light in the medium
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32


Seems to me, this is simply a mapping issue.

We're taking a N dimensional object(photon) and passing it through 4D (space-time) slits onto a 2D screen.
 
  • #33


WOW so i really read through that entire thing to just have the principle of complementarity talked about by one person? (thanks DevilsAvocado in post #29 you got it pretty on) and then its generally just brushed off... Schrödinger/Schrödinger/complementarity is really at the heart of this whole "the truth" about the double slit experiment. These three things pretty much (I dare say with 100% certainty ;)) exhaust what you should be getting out of the slit experiments.

People keep confusing the whole particle-wave duality concept that is really right near base of QM. Everyone gets confused because they are attempting to describe, say electrons, from a QM stand point with a classical mind set. Principle of complementarity + Schrödinger wave eq. + Schrödinger all put together makes the entire particle-wave duality picture. In QM its quantum objects that exhibit particle behavior in some cases and wave behavior in others. There is not just particle and just wave.

"Is light a particle or a wave?" answer: YES
"Is an electron a particle or a wave?" answer: YES

no "or" just "and" lol

-GL
 
Last edited:
  • #34


GreenLantern said:
... no "or" just "and" lol

Glad it worked for you GreenLantern!

Yeah, it’s really at the core of QM, and it has been listed as the http://physics-animations.com/Physics/English/top10.htm" by physicists in NYT.

And things move on, and now Shahriar S. Afshar is claiming that his http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afshar_experiment" invalidates the complementarity principle, although this claim has not been published in any peer-reviewed journal.

But the "or" is clearly hanging loose, as his paper has been peer-reviewed and was published in Foundations of Physics in January 2007:

[PLAIN]http://www.sciencefriday.com/images/shows/2004/073004/AfsharExperimentSmall.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #35


Sorry if this is off-topic a bit, but do electrons show diffraction patterns when fired through a single slit?
 
  • #36


No check #8
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
532
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
8K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • · Replies 81 ·
3
Replies
81
Views
7K