ThiagoMNobrega said:
the double slit experiment with photon detectors
Is not the experiment you are running. With a light source that has low enough intensity that individual "photon" impacts can be seen at the detector (i.e. individual dots of light that, over time, build up an interference pattern), then you do need to bring in quantum mechanics to explain what is going on. But you're not doing that.
ThiagoMNobrega said:
seem to "collapse once observed".
Each individual photon impact on the detector in the low intensity version of the experiment I described above corresponds to a "collapse" in QM, yes. (But what exactly "collapse" means depends on which interpretation of QM you adopt. Discussion of QM interpretations belongs in the interpretations subforum, not here.)
ThiagoMNobrega said:
At which point should the wave function collapse?
With the version of the experiment you are running, the "wave function" viewpoint isn't even necessary. Basically you are looking at an interference pattern formed by classical light. Such light can, for all practical purposes, be viewed as "always collapsed". There is no need for QM or "collapse" at all in analyzing the experiment you are running. If you want to test anything about QM, you need to have a different apparatus that can run the low intensity version of the experiment I described above.
ThiagoMNobrega said:
How come the output doesn't collapse like they do with photon detectors?
Your belief that "the output doesn't collapse" is incorrect. See above.
ThiagoMNobrega said:
the results is a video that seems to be showing the wave function
No, it doesn't, it shows a classical interference pattern.
ThiagoMNobrega said:
I'm using lasers that continuously shoot out photons.
No, you are using lasers that continuously shoot out
light. Viewing this light as "photons" is pointless for your experiment because the light intensity is too high for that.
ThiagoMNobrega said:
Since the microscope is recording (I'm also straight up looking at the experiment going on) doesn't that count as an observation?
An "observation", as far as QM is concerned, happens as soon as the light hits your detector.
ThiagoMNobrega said:
As to which photons pass through which slit, I'd imagine I can use two laser pointers with different colors and than check out the recording to see which colored photons are at which side..
If you have two lasers instead of one, you don't have a single light source, you have two light sources, and with laser pointers, it will be impossible for the two light sources to be coherent enough to tell you anything useful. You'll just see a blob of the two different colors mixed.
"Which-way" experiments of this sort with light are best done with polarizers behind each slit. That would indeed be testing aspects of QM,
if your light source is good enough. (I'm not sure if "laser pointers" would qualify.) With a good enough light source, you should be able to "tune" the degree to which you see interference at the detector by adjusting the relative orientations of the polarizers at the two slits.
ThiagoMNobrega said:
I'm a bit lost on the there is no way to observe a photon
Not with light of the intensity you're using. There is no way to resolve such light into individual photons.
With light of low enough intensity, as I said above, you can see individual "photon" impacts on a suitable detector as dots. There are also photodetectors that emit clicks (by amplifying single photons into an electric current that can drive a speaker). But an ordinary microscope is not the right tool for these kinds of things.