|
 MDMC
Strangler
Registered: 03/19/08
Posts: 58
Last seen: 7 months, 29 days
|
 Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment
#8167778 - 03/19/08 04:41 PM (8 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Light can be a defined as a wave or a particle but it changes its properties when it is observed.
Mind bending! How can this be?
Why does having an observer effect the physical properties?
|
IAMenlightened
GOD
Registered: 03/02/08
Posts: 156
Loc: FLA
Last seen: 4 months, 19 days
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: MDMC]
#8167807 - 03/19/08 04:46 PM (8 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
makes me think of if a tree fell in the woods did it make a noise
--------------------
|
MDMC
Strangler
Registered: 03/19/08
Posts: 58
Last seen: 7 months, 29 days
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: IAMenlightened]
#8168439 - 03/19/08 06:31 PM (8 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Seems the noise may choose to sound different when it knows you are listening.
|
 DieCommie
Ally
Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 7,655
Loc: The Union
Last seen: 1 minute, 25 seconds
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: MDMC]
#8168449 - 03/19/08 06:32 PM (8 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Not just light but particles (mass) also! Why? Who knows why the universe is the way it is...
Look into the Heisenberg uncertainty principle to gain a little conceptual understanding of why you cannot observe something without effecting it. In short the only way to observe anything is to bounce shit off of it. With sight we bounce light off of things we see. But of course when you bounce light off of something, you effect it.
--------------------
Behold yon miserable creature. That Point is a Being like ourselves, but confined to the non-dimensional Gulf. He is himself his own World, his own Universe; of any other than himself he can form no conception; he knows not Length, nor Breadth, nor Height, for he has had no experience of them; he has no cognizance even of the number Two; nor has he a thought of Plurality; for he is himself his One and All, being really Nothing. Yet mark his perfect self-contentment, and hence learn his lesson, that to be self-contented is to be vile and ignorant, and that to aspire is better than to be blindly and impotently happy.
|
NewbieShroomie
Registered: 07/18/04
Posts: 9,628
Loc: 'Burbs of Philly
Last seen: 1 minute, 7 seconds
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: DieCommie]
#8169386 - 03/19/08 09:43 PM (8 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
I thought we absorbed light with our eyes, I didn't know we shot light out of them at stuff.
--------------------
~=-=~=-=~=-=~=-=~
Confucius say, "He who go to bed with itchy butthole wake up with smelly finger."
|
DieCommie
Ally
Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 7,655
Loc: The Union
Last seen: 1 minute, 25 seconds
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: NewbieShroomie]
#8169442 - 03/19/08 09:51 PM (8 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
 We use light bulbs to shoot light at stuff... but you already knew thats what I meant 
--------------------
Behold yon miserable creature. That Point is a Being like ourselves, but confined to the non-dimensional Gulf. He is himself his own World, his own Universe; of any other than himself he can form no conception; he knows not Length, nor Breadth, nor Height, for he has had no experience of them; he has no cognizance even of the number Two; nor has he a thought of Plurality; for he is himself his One and All, being really Nothing. Yet mark his perfect self-contentment, and hence learn his lesson, that to be self-contented is to be vile and ignorant, and that to aspire is better than to be blindly and impotently happy.
|
 johnm214
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 7,022
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: DieCommie]
#8169624 - 03/19/08 10:30 PM (8 months, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Not me, I capture ambient light with my forehead and focus it in the direction of my gaze.
|
trendal
point of inflection
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 17,687
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: MDMC]
#8171242 - 03/20/08 10:40 AM (8 months, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Why does having an observer effect the physical properties?
This is a fallacy, probably based on the fact that quantum physicists use a different meaning for "observer" than is normally assumed.
When you do an experiment with light, like the double-slit experiment, what changes is the setup of the experiment...not the actual light. The light is exactly the same, whether we measure it as being a particle or as a wave.
--------------------
You're here because you know something.
What you know you can't explain,
But you feel it;
You've felt it your entire life.
That there's something wrong with the world.
You don't know what it is, but it's there....
Like a splinter in your mind...
Driving you mad.
|
DieCommie
Ally
Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 7,655
Loc: The Union
Last seen: 1 minute, 25 seconds
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: trendal]
#8171606 - 03/20/08 11:58 AM (8 months, 11 days ago) |
|
|
What do you mean what changes is the setup of the experiment? The light does change if it is observed or not. You cannot measure light as a wave, when you measure it it collapses to a particle. If you run the double slit experiment (with light or mass) and dont look to see what slit it goes through, you get an interference pattern. If you do look to se what slit it goes through, you do not get an interference pattern. That is a clear indication that observation does have an effect.
John Bell showed this is the case in 1964. He proved that there are no hidden variables, and the fact that we dont know where the particle is before observation is not due to our ignorance but is a fact of nature. This eliminates the so called 'realist' interpretation, and leaves only the copenhagen or agnostic interpretations.
--------------------
Behold yon miserable creature. That Point is a Being like ourselves, but confined to the non-dimensional Gulf. He is himself his own World, his own Universe; of any other than himself he can form no conception; he knows not Length, nor Breadth, nor Height, for he has had no experience of them; he has no cognizance even of the number Two; nor has he a thought of Plurality; for he is himself his One and All, being really Nothing. Yet mark his perfect self-contentment, and hence learn his lesson, that to be self-contented is to be vile and ignorant, and that to aspire is better than to be blindly and impotently happy.
|
trendal
point of inflection
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 17,687
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: DieCommie]
#8171668 - 03/20/08 12:12 PM (8 months, 11 days ago) |
|
|
What do you mean what changes is the setup of the experiment?
Very simple...the experiment changes based on whether you have 1 or 2 slits open. A change in the experiment provides a change in observation.
The light does change if it is observed or not.
"Observed" is such a loaded word...
Rather, we should say that light is affected by whatever it is we use to observe it. The idea of "observed" meaning an "intelligent observer" is wrong to use here.
You cannot measure light as a wave
Really? Then what is the double slit experiment performed with two open slits doing?
when you measure it it collapses to a particle
The notion of a "particle" is wrong and out-dated. Light is not a small ball of anything.
If you run the double slit experiment (with light or mass) and dont look to see what slit it goes through, you get an interference pattern. If you do look to se what slit it goes through, you do not get an interference pattern. That is a clear indication that observation does have an effect.
Again, observation (although commonly used) is not the right word to use. If you set anything in the path of the light beam to detect it, you are changing the experiment. It isn't the same as running the experiment without a detector.
--------------------
You're here because you know something.
What you know you can't explain,
But you feel it;
You've felt it your entire life.
That there's something wrong with the world.
You don't know what it is, but it's there....
Like a splinter in your mind...
Driving you mad.
|
trendal
point of inflection
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 17,687
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: trendal]
#8171679 - 03/20/08 12:14 PM (8 months, 11 days ago) |
|
|
The point I'm trying to get across is that light is only "weird" when you think of it in a classical physics approach. If you cast aside any and all notions of "particles" or "waves" and just look at what experimenting tells us, it isn't strange at all.
--------------------
You're here because you know something.
What you know you can't explain,
But you feel it;
You've felt it your entire life.
That there's something wrong with the world.
You don't know what it is, but it's there....
Like a splinter in your mind...
Driving you mad.
|
DieCommie
Ally
Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 7,655
Loc: The Union
Last seen: 1 minute, 25 seconds
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: trendal]
#8171776 - 03/20/08 12:44 PM (8 months, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The notion of a "particle" is wrong and out-dated. Light is not a small ball of anything.
So you are saying that wavefunctions dont collapse to particles when observed? (yes, I know observed does not imply consciousness)
Quote:
Really? Then what is the double slit experiment performed with two open slits doing?
You can infer that it was a wave going through the slits, because the particles that impact the screen form an interference pattern. So, what I mean was if you make a observation it will collapse to a particle. If you wait for it to impact the screen to make you observation, it will be a particle, but the particles form an interference pattern.
Quote:
If you cast aside any and all notions of "particles" or "waves" and just look at what experimenting tells us, it isn't strange at all.
And what is it that it tells us? It tells us that it behaves as a particle sometimes, and a wave sometimes. You have to take both into account to describe experiments. Why would you cast aside waves and particles? The schrodinger equation is a wave equation, and the collapsed wave function is the delta function which is a particle.
--------------------
Behold yon miserable creature. That Point is a Being like ourselves, but confined to the non-dimensional Gulf. He is himself his own World, his own Universe; of any other than himself he can form no conception; he knows not Length, nor Breadth, nor Height, for he has had no experience of them; he has no cognizance even of the number Two; nor has he a thought of Plurality; for he is himself his One and All, being really Nothing. Yet mark his perfect self-contentment, and hence learn his lesson, that to be self-contented is to be vile and ignorant, and that to aspire is better than to be blindly and impotently happy.
|
TheCow
Registered: 10/28/02
Posts: 4,637
Last seen: 4 months, 27 days
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: DieCommie]
#8172164 - 03/20/08 02:33 PM (8 months, 11 days ago) |
|
|
The collapsed wave function is merely the highest probability location of the eigenstate of the linear superposition. Just think of the hydrogen atom, if you try and measure where the electron is it will take the highest probability location, I forget what that turns out to be. You just use the position operator. It is true though, that if you place a detector at a slit it will mess up the results, there a lot of theories why that is. It goes deeper than just the 'we cant observe it' phenomenon, you can explain it much better mathematically.
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 16,838
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 hours, 38 minutes
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: trendal]
#8172924 - 03/20/08 06:09 PM (8 months, 11 days ago) |
|
|
> and just look at what experimenting tells us, it isn't strange at all.
Ah, so please explain the mechanism behind this non-strange event.
--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.
|
MDMC
Strangler
Registered: 03/19/08
Posts: 58
Last seen: 7 months, 29 days
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: trendal]
#8172990 - 03/20/08 06:25 PM (8 months, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Your saying that when a device observes which hole, it has to alter the particle/wave in the very act of observing it?
Isn't there a method of detection that doesn't alter it? I suppose not.
What about the particle interfering with itself? That is strange!
|
MDMC
Strangler
Registered: 03/19/08
Posts: 58
Last seen: 7 months, 29 days
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: trendal]
#8172998 - 03/20/08 06:26 PM (8 months, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Can you explain entanglement?
|
trendal
point of inflection
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 17,687
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: DieCommie]
#8174977 - 03/21/08 06:43 AM (8 months, 11 days ago) |
|
|
So you are saying that wavefunctions dont collapse to particles when observed? (yes, I know observed does not imply consciousness)
I'm saying the notion of "particles" doesn't work for light.
You can infer that it was a wave going through the slits, because the particles that impact the screen form an interference pattern. So, what I mean was if you make a observation it will collapse to a particle. If you wait for it to impact the screen to make you observation, it will be a particle, but the particles form an interference pattern.
Then don't you see my point? Light is not made of particles. The fact that we see two different things in the double slit experiment is proof of that. Likewise, light is not made of waves, either.
Your last sentence didn't really make sense...how can a "particle" create an interference pattern with itself?
And what is it that it tells us? It tells us that it behaves as a particle sometimes, and a wave sometimes. You have to take both into account to describe experiments. Why would you cast aside waves and particles? The schrodinger equation is a wave equation, and the collapsed wave function is the delta function which is a particle.
Our observations of light under some circumstances appears as a wave...in others it appears as a particle. That doesn't mean that light is a wave or particle...just that it appears as such. You're right, we do have to take both into account when describing light.
Why would you cast aside waves and particles?
Why? Because they cannot both be an accurate description of light.
--------------------
You're here because you know something.
What you know you can't explain,
But you feel it;
You've felt it your entire life.
That there's something wrong with the world.
You don't know what it is, but it's there....
Like a splinter in your mind...
Driving you mad.
|
TheCow
Registered: 10/28/02
Posts: 4,637
Last seen: 4 months, 27 days
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: trendal]
#8175890 - 03/21/08 01:13 PM (8 months, 10 days ago) |
|
|
In the end, we talk about whatever model makes more sense for what we are doing. There are many physical models that talk about light as a particle, and some that refer to it as a wave, and some that you have to take both into account. I think you are arguing a semantical point here Trendal.
For instance, when doing nonlinear optics we more or less take both into account to get out our non linear susceptibilities. You take the Schrodinger equation and for the potential you use the dipole moment caused between the incoming electric field and the electron.
However you can also simply use a Lorentzian model where for instance the electron is simply a particle. In this model the electrons are attached to springs that move around with the electric field.
Also theres a model that you can use where the photons behave as particles and the susceptibility is based off of momentum transfer and other things.
The results are all similar, though the SE gives you the entire picture, the other models give you a fair amount of information and if all you wanted was certain bits of info those models work just fine. I think you have the impression that physicists always work with the most accurate models or keep their equations as physicaly realistic as possible. The truth is that scientists dont try and make things more complicated than it needs to be. There are so many expansions out to the first order, for instance you will find first order Taylor expansions several times in some derivation, or you will find this expansion: (1+x)^1/2 = 1+x/2 Things like that, and these equations still work.
It all depends what level of accuracy you are going for. Sure as I said there are cases where youd want to take the particle/wave into account, but there are a huge amount where you can choose which one you want to model.
Another example would be mode-locked lasers. In the laser cavity you will have a large number of modes of light, these will build with constructive interference and get released in pulses. This is a wave model.
And other things will use a particle model.
Basically, it does make sense to model light as a certain thing, it just depends what you are trying to get accomplished.
|
imachavel
Stranger
Registered: 06/06/07
Posts: 1,501
Last seen: 8 months, 6 days
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: TheCow]
#8176019 - 03/21/08 01:53 PM (8 months, 10 days ago) |
|
|
damn, this shit is fascinating. you know, i don't really understand any of this, but it's fascinating as shit to me. what the hell is quantum physics? what is antimatter and how did they make an matter antimatter explosion?
|
DieCommie
Ally
Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 7,655
Loc: The Union
Last seen: 1 minute, 25 seconds
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: imachavel]
#8176221 - 03/21/08 02:54 PM (8 months, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quantum physics basically is the laws that govern things on a small scale. The way things work on small scales is very different then the way we intuitively think things work. One popular example that turns your intuition upside down is quantum tunneling, basically there is a finite chance that any particle or collection of particles can move through potential barriers (like a wall) without destroying the barrier or wall. You can calculate the probabliity you would be able to go right through a door without breaking it. (its a very low probability as you would guess...) Interesting mind bending stuff!
Anti-particles are not as interesting as they sound (I think). For every particle, there is an anti particle. The anti particle has the same spin, mass but the opposite charge. For example the anti particle of an electron is a positron. Instead of being negative it is positive. If a particle collides with an anti particle they annihilate each other and turn into pure energy (gamma rays). Hence we dont have anti matter around us, it would annihilate with the 'regular' matter. The anti matter explosion you speak of is the process of annihilation.
--------------------
Behold yon miserable creature. That Point is a Being like ourselves, but confined to the non-dimensional Gulf. He is himself his own World, his own Universe; of any other than himself he can form no conception; he knows not Length, nor Breadth, nor Height, for he has had no experience of them; he has no cognizance even of the number Two; nor has he a thought of Plurality; for he is himself his One and All, being really Nothing. Yet mark his perfect self-contentment, and hence learn his lesson, that to be self-contented is to be vile and ignorant, and that to aspire is better than to be blindly and impotently happy.
|
imachavel
Stranger
Registered: 06/06/07
Posts: 1,501
Last seen: 8 months, 6 days
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: DieCommie]
#8178455 - 03/22/08 12:52 AM (8 months, 10 days ago) |
|
|
have they proved anti matter exists? i thought energy could never be created or destroyed
|
DieCommie
Ally
Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 7,655
Loc: The Union
Last seen: 1 minute, 25 seconds
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: imachavel]
#8178516 - 03/22/08 01:14 AM (8 months, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Yea, antimatter does exist and is created by humans in things like particle accelerators (the most expensive substance ever). Also, some radioactive sources emit positrons.
Yes the idea that energy cannot be created or destroyed is correct, but you have to consider mass a type of energy. Einstein showed this with the famous E=mc^2. So if mass is a type of energy, then when antimatter collides with regular matter and emits gamma rays its just a conversion of one type of energy to another, 'mass' energy to 'gamma ray' energy. No energy is created or destroyed. And when radioactive isotopes emit energy, they lose some of their mass.
Think about this... If they can create antimatter in a particle accelerator, and antimatter annihilates with regular matter, how can they store the antimatter? If they put it in a container, it would annihilate with the regular matter in the container and disappear into gamma rays.
--------------------
Behold yon miserable creature. That Point is a Being like ourselves, but confined to the non-dimensional Gulf. He is himself his own World, his own Universe; of any other than himself he can form no conception; he knows not Length, nor Breadth, nor Height, for he has had no experience of them; he has no cognizance even of the number Two; nor has he a thought of Plurality; for he is himself his One and All, being really Nothing. Yet mark his perfect self-contentment, and hence learn his lesson, that to be self-contented is to be vile and ignorant, and that to aspire is better than to be blindly and impotently happy.
|
cleeen
Registered: 05/23/07
Posts: 383
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: DieCommie]
#8182636 - 03/23/08 06:16 AM (8 months, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Matter antimatter under supercooled magnetic field ..
--------------------
It's a beautiful lie ..
It's a perfect denial .
Such a beautiful lie to believe in
So beautiful, beautiful it makes me ..
Nikopol: You piece of shit! Your objectives are shit. Your filthy rapist god ambitions are shit. You're full of shit, Horus!
Horus: Coming from a human, remarks like that don't carry much weight.
Nikopol: But all that it is not worth of prodigy of your saliva, Jill.
|
cleeen
Registered: 05/23/07
Posts: 383
|
Re: Quantum Physics - The double slit experiment [Re: MDMC]
#8185322 - 03/23/08 10:40 PM (8 months, 8 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
MDMC said:
Your saying that when a device observes which hole, it has to alter the particle/wave in the very act of observing it?
Isn't there a method of detection that doesn't alter it? I suppose not.
What about the particle interfering with itself? That is strange!
At the level of classic direct observation energy is flung at the article and the rebound is the data that results in the observable image .. this is oK and completely fair , but imagine that on the level of the photon the sensor must flood the area with particles smaller than the object being watched .. this is difficult and instead we are throwing rocks into a pond to measure how flat it is ..
--------------------
It's a beautiful lie ..
It's a perfect denial .
Such a beautiful lie to believe in
So beautiful, beautiful it makes me ..
Nikopol: You piece of shit! Your objectives are shit. Your filthy rapist god ambitions are shit. You're full of shit, Horus!
Horus: Coming from a human, remarks like that don't carry much weight.
Nikopol: But all that it is not worth of prodigy of your saliva, Jill.
|
cleeen
|
login or 
register to post messages and view our members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, encrypted messages, file attachments, board customizations, and much more!
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
Quote 
