this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
1530 points (97.5% liked)

Science Memes

11205 readers
4460 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Nougat@kbin.social 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

The double slit experiment demonstrates the wave-particle duality of light.

You shoot photons at a barrier that has two slits in it. The pattern on the backstop appears as in the top right panel: an interference pattern, because light is behaving as a wave.

Next, you set up a detector at the slits, so that you can determine which slit each photon passed through, one photon at a time. Now the pattern on the backstop appears as the lower right panel, not an interference pattern, because each photon is acting as a particle.

Not looking: wave. Looking: particle.

[–] Neato@kbin.social 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Exactly. The issue is that you can't detect photons without interacting with them. So it isn't observation like so many people think. It's that if you interact with subatomic particles you change their state.

[–] ALostInquirer@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

The issue is that you can’t detect photons without interacting with them.

Can't...So far, right? Like there hasn't been a method developed to somehow detect indirectly without interaction? I don't know enough about this to know how one might go about that, but I imagine those that know more might love to given whatever knowledge may be gained.

[–] Neato@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No. Can't. The only interaction sensors have is with particles. Photons usually. All things give off light but then measuring light itself, measuring is destructive.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Lol this guy still believes in particles

[–] DrQuint@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Ah! A field absolutist. Keep preaching, friend.

[–] Klear@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Detecting" equals "interaction" in this context. You can't detect them without detecting them.

[–] ALostInquirer@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

Although, given some further thought, isn't the double-slit experiment being discussed here sort of demonstrative of a "detection" without detection, i.e. the wave pattern vs. the particle pattern emerging after "detection/measurement/interaction"? Or am I misunderstanding it?

Is there another way they operate/appear outside of the wave-particle that eludes observation?

Im not an expert but tour comment should be on top. Knowing this, all makes sense so easy.

[–] elxeno@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What if u look at only one of the slits?

[–] Gabu@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Same deal, you're still measuring and can still determine which photons passed through which slit.

[–] fruitSnackSupreme@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But then you potentially wouldn't be interacting with all the photons right?

[–] Gabu@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

You are, just not in an intuitive way. Because you'd know the rate of emission of your light source, the information of when a photon passes slit-2 would still "tag" them (whatever photon didn't pass slit-1 must have passed slit-2).