Uncertainity and the double-slit experiment with electrons

In summary, the double-slit experiment with electrons shows that observing the electron's path destroys the interference pattern. This can be seen in a thought experiment with a light source, where the uncertainty of the electron's momentum becomes large enough to destroy the pattern. In a variation of the thought experiment without a light source, one could try to accelerate the electron and detect its path through other means. However, the uncertainty principle still applies and the electron's momentum would still be disturbed, ultimately destroying the interference pattern. One possible explanation for this is the emission of photons and the resulting change in momentum.
  • #1
koroljov
26
0
Consider the double-slit experiment with electrons.

It is so, that observing trough which split the electron goes will destroy the interference pattern.

This can be seen in a thought experiment in which one adds a light source near the splits. One can calculate that as soon as the wavelength of the light is such that it can be distinguished trough which split the electron goes, the uncertainity on the electron's momentum becomes large enough to destroy the interference pattern.

Now consider this variation on the thought experiment, in which no light source is used to detect the electrons:

One might try , instead of bombarding the electron with photons, to make the electron radiate photons by accelerating it (accelerating charges radiate photons), for example by adding a local electrical field. In this way, the momentum of the electron would not be disturbed while it can be known trough which split the electron went (by adding light detectors on strategical places).

There must be some error in the above reasoning, and I'd like to know what it is. There must be some mechanism that disturbs the electron's momentum enough to destroy the interference pattern.

solution?
This "solution" is pure speculation on my part. It may be totally wrong. But I'll add it anyway:
I read that the electrical force (that could be used to accelerate the electron, and, thus, make it radiate photons) is caused by the exchange of particles known as "Virtual photons". (I read that here: http://www.physics.ox.ac.uk/documents/PUS/dis/virtual_photon.htm) . Is it so that using an electromagnetic field to accelerate the electrons is not fundamentally different from trying to illuminate them, i.e. both ways involve shooting at the electrons with (virtual) photons? Or is this "solution" totally wrong and is there some other mechanism that is unknown to me?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
koroljov said:
One might try , instead of bombarding the electron with photons, to make the electron radiate photons by accelerating it (accelerating charges radiate photons), for example by adding a local electrical field. In this way, the momentum of the electron would not be disturbed while it can be known trough which split the electron went (by adding light detectors on strategical places).

How can an electron (or anything else!) accelerate without changing its momentum? Remember, momentum is a vector quantity, and the uncertainty principle applies to each component of momentum separately: [itex]\Delta x \Delta p_x < \hbar / 2[/itex], etc.

If an electron emits a photon (which must have momentum), it must certainly change its momentum as it recoils.
 
  • #3
jtbell said:
How can an electron (or anything else!) accelerate without changing its momentum?
You're right, but the change of momentum is known if the electrical field used to accelerate it is known.

jtbell said:
Remember, momentum is a vector quantity, and the uncertainty principle applies to each component of momentum separately
I know.

jtbell said:
If an electron emits a photon (which must have momentum), it must certainly change its momentum as it recoils.
Hmmm. That must be it. I should have thought of that. Thank you for this information.
 

1. What is the double-slit experiment with electrons?

The double-slit experiment is a famous thought experiment in quantum mechanics that involves passing electrons through two parallel slits and observing the resulting interference pattern on a screen. It helps to illustrate the concept of wave-particle duality, which states that particles like electrons can exhibit both wave-like and particle-like behaviors.

2. What does the double-slit experiment tell us about uncertainty?

The double-slit experiment highlights the concept of uncertainty in quantum mechanics. The position of an electron cannot be precisely determined as it passes through the slits, and its path is described by a probability distribution rather than a definite trajectory. This uncertainty is a fundamental aspect of the quantum world and challenges our classical understanding of the universe.

3. How does the double-slit experiment demonstrate the wave-particle duality of electrons?

The double-slit experiment shows that electrons behave like waves when they pass through the slits, creating an interference pattern on the screen. This pattern can only be explained by the electrons behaving like waves and interfering with each other, rather than individual particles hitting the screen. However, when we try to observe the electrons, they behave like particles and the interference pattern disappears.

4. Why is the double-slit experiment important in understanding quantum mechanics?

The double-slit experiment is crucial in understanding the fundamental principles of quantum mechanics. It challenges our classical understanding of the world and shows that particles can behave like waves, and vice versa. It also highlights the concept of uncertainty and the probabilistic nature of the quantum world.

5. Can the double-slit experiment be applied to other particles besides electrons?

Yes, the double-slit experiment has been performed with various particles, including photons, atoms, and even large molecules. It consistently shows the same results, demonstrating that the principles of quantum mechanics apply to all particles, regardless of their size or composition.

Similar threads

Replies
32
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
Replies
60
Views
3K
Replies
26
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
780
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
641
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
18
Views
1K
Back
Top