This is off Wikipedia. The videoos say no wave interference pattern if you watch the particle. But this Wikipedia article says: the measuring stops the pattern not the "observing", in other words a whole lot of videos on bulldust. "To the extent that the usual course in Quantum Mechanics for physics students discusses interpretations at all, it usually presents only a simple probability view. Quantum Mechanics describes the world in terms of a "wave function" or "state function." When we see, say, electrons in a two slit experiment forming an interference pattern, we say that a wave has split up, gone through the two slits, and then re-combined. This is the normal way of explaining two slit interference of any type of wave. The Quantum Mechanical wave, the wave function, is interpreted as being the amplitude of the probability of finding the electron at some position in space. Thus, when we don't look at what is happening at the slits, there is a 50% chance a given electron went through the upper slit and a 50% chance it went through the lower slit. Thus the wave function has an amplitude at both slits, and then when later the wave functions re-combine we get interference. If we set up an experiment at the slits to see what the electrons are doing, we see each electron going through either the upper slit or through the lower slit, never through both slits at once. But the process of doing this measurement "collapses the wave function" so that it has a non-zero amplitude only at the slit where we see the electron. And it is this collapse that destroys the interference pattern."
We were taught light can act like a particle (photon) and like a wave. Actually we were taught even physical objects eg. a baseball act like particles (off coarse) but have a wavelength (sounds weird but supposedly true, by memory). These guys are saying when you look at the double slit experiment, you change the result, it stops looking like wave interference and looks like particles only (photons). That watching was making things happen by watching. This sounded ridiculous to me. What the article in Wikipedia says is that when you try and measure the photons going through one slit, or the other, the measuring apparatus interfers somehow with the photon, reducing its wavelength attributes, and that is why the wavelength effects reduce. Quoting the Wikipedia quote: "But the process of doing this measurement "collapses the wave function" so that it has a non-zero amplitude only at the slit where we see the electron. And it is this collapse that destroys the interference pattern."" They extend the false concept many ways, saying God must be watching because of this.
I think if things are not observed, they may as well not happen. That is why living beings observe the universe, so my theory is (if no aliens etc, and not counting spirits or God, etc)the earth is the centre of the universe, because, that is where the universe is perceived.
We were taught in physics that the simplest way to observe our solar system is the planets orbit the sun and that is obviously true. But our textbook did mention that you can treat the earth as the centre, but you get all these weird spirals etc. Now all I am saying with my theory is that "in the perception sense, (disregarding other metaphysical spirits, aliens etc) the earth can be the centre of the universe, in that sense. Just like we say the sun rises and sets, but we know the earth is orbiting the sun and not visa versa, in the simplest explanation.
@ Bill. Oh please! wiki! Hello! For you in the land of Oz. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEaEGpj3AvQ&feature=youtu.be https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCApxF4KMXdRFhcZQpe3Lgtg
Golly! Will your chinese overlords treat you better than your Crown overloads?
This is off Wikipedia. The videoos say no wave interference pattern if you watch the particle.
ReplyDeleteBut this Wikipedia article says: the measuring stops the pattern not the "observing", in other words a whole lot of videos on bulldust.
"To the extent that the usual course in Quantum Mechanics for physics students discusses interpretations at all, it usually presents only a simple probability view. Quantum Mechanics describes the world in terms of a "wave function" or "state function." When we see, say, electrons in a two slit experiment forming an interference pattern, we say that a wave has split up, gone through the two slits, and then re-combined. This is the normal way of explaining two slit interference of any type of wave. The Quantum Mechanical wave, the wave function, is interpreted as being the amplitude of the probability of finding the electron at some position in space. Thus, when we don't look at what is happening at the slits, there is a 50% chance a given electron went through the upper slit and a 50% chance it went through the lower slit. Thus the wave function has an amplitude at both slits, and then when later the wave functions re-combine we get interference. If we set up an experiment at the slits to see what the electrons are doing, we see each electron going through either the upper slit or through the lower slit, never through both slits at once. But the process of doing this measurement "collapses the wave function" so that it has a non-zero amplitude only at the slit where we see the electron. And it is this collapse that destroys the interference pattern."
We were taught light can act like a particle (photon) and like a wave. Actually we were taught even physical objects eg. a baseball act like particles (off coarse) but have a wavelength (sounds weird but supposedly true, by memory). These guys are saying when you look at the double slit experiment, you change the result, it stops looking like wave interference and looks like particles only (photons). That watching was making things happen by watching. This sounded ridiculous to me.
ReplyDeleteWhat the article in Wikipedia says is that when you try and measure the photons going through one slit, or the other, the measuring apparatus interfers somehow with the photon, reducing its wavelength attributes, and that is why the wavelength effects reduce. Quoting the Wikipedia quote: "But the process of doing this measurement "collapses the wave function" so that it has a non-zero amplitude only at the slit where we see the electron. And it is this collapse that destroys the interference pattern.""
They extend the false concept many ways, saying God must be watching because of this.
I think if things are not observed, they may as well not happen. That is why living beings observe the universe, so my theory is (if no aliens etc, and not counting spirits or God, etc)the earth is the centre of the universe, because, that is where the universe is perceived.
We were taught in physics that the simplest way to observe our solar system is the planets orbit the sun and that is obviously true. But our textbook did mention that you can treat the earth as the centre, but you get all these weird spirals etc. Now all I am saying with my theory is that "in the perception sense, (disregarding other metaphysical spirits, aliens etc)
ReplyDeletethe earth can be the centre of the universe, in that sense.
Just like we say the sun rises and sets, but we know the earth is orbiting the sun and not visa versa, in the simplest explanation.
@ Bill. Oh please! wiki! Hello!
ReplyDeleteFor you in the land of Oz.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEaEGpj3AvQ&feature=youtu.be
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCApxF4KMXdRFhcZQpe3Lgtg
Golly! Will your chinese overlords treat you better than your Crown overloads?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete