[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 4 KB, 324x155, double slit.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15346578 No.15346578 [Reply] [Original]

So, does Nature just make up the rules as it goes?
You are telling me that even if you shoot one electron at a time, the pattern on the wall suggests that the electron somehow went through both slits every time?
But when you put any kind of detector in the slits, the electrons only travel through one slit at a time, and they form a different pattern on the wall?
Consciousness does not break the wave function, rather, any kind of logical contradiction is what breaks the wave function. How is this possible?

The detector's results do NOT need to be seen by a human observer for the wave function to collapse, rather, as soon as you put any kind of detector in the slits, the wave function collapses and the electron begins behaving like an individual particle. It's almost like you put the electron into a situation where it is backed into a corner, and it is forced to pick a slit to go through, because you put detectors there, so it would be a logical contradiction otherwise, and that somehow bends the behavior of reality.

Does anybody in the scientific community understand this phenomenon at all either? I don't think anybody claims that they understand the experiment except for schizos who think that the consciousness has anything to do with it (it doesn't).

>> No.15346588

>>15346578
This also happens with time-slits as it turns out.

>> No.15346590

>when you put any kind of detector in the slits, the electrons only travel through one slit at a time, and they form a different pattern on the wall?
i don't buy it. never seen evidence of this, only claims it happens.

>> No.15346608

>>15346590
That's the whole experiment.
You can't "observe" an electron with your fucking eyes, there's no consciousness involved. It's literally just a detector, any kind of measurement to detect which slit the electron goes through, causes it to go through a slit, otherwise it goes through both somehow as if it were a wave of water, and then the two waves interfere with each other like water would, and it produces a pattern on the wall to indicate that. A single fucking electron does that.

>> No.15346621

>>15346578
>Electrons/Photons are monitored with a machine that can see them
Isn't this just reverse billard? shit is in "superposition" hitiing them will give them a particular position.

>> No.15346625

>>15346608
>That's the whole experiment.
which one? you got a source?

>> No.15346641

>>15346578
the double slit experiment simply demonstrates that what a quantum particle does depends on what measurement will take place. this is a violation of bell's statistical independence. what does this point to? superdeterminism.

>> No.15346670

>>15346625
It's an experiment.
Anybody can do it. You can do it yourself, that's the source.
Science isn't about source, it's about reproducibility, if you can't reproduce it yourself then it's fake. Sources are just for reference so you know what to do when you recreate it yourself.

>> No.15346685

>>15346670
reproduce what? what's the specific methodology you're claiming i should reproduce? what equipment do i need, how was the data analyzed, etc.?

>> No.15346706

>>15346590
>i don't buy it. never seen evidence of this, only claims it happens.
https://physicsworld.com/a/double-slits-with-single-atoms/
First experiment with SINGLE electrons occurred in 2013 and showed exactly what was expected.
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/15/3/033018/meta
Feel free to spelunk the 186 papers citing that one as well
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232608419_Controlled_Double-Slit_Electron_Diffraction
Naturally, the detector only detecting one electron each "hit", built up into a diffraction pattern.

>> No.15346709

>>15346578
actually, no, the electron doesn't go through both slits, in fact it goes through neither.
>electron gets emitted
>calculates all possible paths
>these paths interact with each other for unknown reason, causing diffraction pattern that affects the probabilities of each potential path
>without actually taking any of the paths, electron just appears on the screen on the location based on its probability distribution
the real question is why does the diffraction pattern emerge in the first place. i would say it's a good argument for simulation theory, i.e. that's how the simulation was written.

>> No.15346725

>>15346706
>>15346590
>and they form a different pattern on the wall?
Just realized, are you talking about the mistake people make showing two distinct "blobs" instead of the fact they build up to one blob?

In any case it's a bit ambiguous what you meant so you can also just watch this segment in case you meant the other thing people often fuck up explaining https://youtu.be/RQv5CVELG3U?t=108

>> No.15346748

>>15346725
my dude, there is nothing ambiguous about my objection. tell me, what do you think are the multiple meanings? and to be clear, yes i'm talking about how the electrons don't pass through both slits as particles. by the way, i prefer linking to arxiv articles (like for the Batelaan paper you cited), since you never need to worry about them being paywalled.

>> No.15346772

>>15346748
Oh sure, you aren't the problem. Everyone else is. No ambiguity with your retarded objections whatsoever. It can't be that you know so goddamn little about the topic I have to guess at the nearest analogue of anything relevant, no, everyone else is dumb. Speaking of being clear as mud,
>and to be clear, yes i'm talking about how the electrons don't pass through both slits as particles.
What the fuck does this even mean?
1. Particles exhibit wave-like interference
2. They are detectable as particles
???
>electrons don't pass through both slits as particles.
I have no idea what you think that means. Try using the relevant jargon for clarity instead. If you don't know the relevant concepts and terms, then stop pretending you do and just fully lay out where you're confused and why without the demonstrably unwarranted smugness.

>> No.15346785
File: 1.58 MB, 615x346, pilot wave.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15346785

pilot wave theory
the particle produces it's own waves as it moves, akin to charged particles creating magnetic fields as they move.
charged particles are affected by magnetic fields, so too could this electron be affected by it's own reflected waves.
then, a single electron could interfere with itself by virtue of the waves reflecting off the wall of the slit as it passes through, yielding a probablistic pattern on the detector where particles have a higher chance of being detected where the reflected waves interfere.

or particles don't exist, and what we describe as a particle is just a packet of condensed waves, that still behave like waves, and the particle effect is illusory.
or its god
or something else

>> No.15346802
File: 1.16 MB, 829x778, Shadow_Blister_Effect_example_-_wall_in_front[1].gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15346802

>>15346685
>>15346670
You can "reproduce" the same results at home using the tip of a needle and a laser. It produces the same interference pattern. I call it the "no slit double slit negation experiment", but neither that or the double actually explains how light does this. The real reason is because light is an electromagnetic phenomena and like all other electromagnetic phenomena isn't induced to exist unless the conditions at point a and b (such as a cathode and anode) allow for it to. That is the molecules on the screen being discharged upon by the electron gun.

Another example of where a similar scenario happens is with shadows and the "Shadow blister effect". Will you concede that the diffraction pattern appears because it's actually the shadows around the slit bending and warping into themselves and the light around them? Both phenomena happen because the objects creating the shadows are objects in the way of an electrical discharge, also being part of the very same discharge taking place. This also explains how several polarizing lenses can make the information "disappear" then reappear with the introduction of simply being rotated. Because the light is always "already at point b" even if the lens seemingly makes the transverse wave disappear. The longitudinal component still exists and is therefore polarized by the next lens to become "visible" as a transverse wave.

.

>> No.15346852

>>15346772
>What the fuck does this even mean?
>1. Particles exhibit wave-like interference
>2. They are detectable as particles
you tell me -- it's precisely what sabine said in the video you posted.

>> No.15346854

>>15346852
>you tell me -- it's precisely what sabine said in the video you posted.
Oh my God you colossal cuntasaurus rex. What. Do YOU. Think it means.

>> No.15346902

>>15346709
That's another way of wording it, but in a sense it does go through both slits in your example too, it just simulates going through both slits lol.

>> No.15346909

>>15346854
i understand you're using to debating schizos, but i'm on your side here dummy. i was trying to play the socratic method to get them to cite the evidence they saw for thinking that electrons display NO INTERFERENCE PATTERN on the screens when going through one slit (which, as you know, is bunk). meanwhile you somehow thought that was ambiguous and thought who knows what, because who knows why.

>> No.15346914

I don't think anybody on the Earth really understands the nature of this experiment. Many people understand what is happening here but they don't know the implications of it or why nature behaves like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1YqgPAtzho

>> No.15346921

To me it seems like a loop-hole in logic, when you set-up an experiment that forces the electron into a logical predicament, such that it would create a contradiction, it behaves differently because it can't create a contradiction.

>> No.15346929

Schrodinger's Cat cannot be dead and alive at the same time, so when you do anything that verifies if the cat is dead or alive, you necessitate a decision, because otherwise there would be a contradiction. But if nothing happens which verifies whether it is dead or alive, then it will be both dead and alive because there is no contradiction until you open the box and look at it.

And as far as I'm aware no scientist knows how to determine what the outcome will be, dead or alive, they can only estimate it as a probability and I've heard some people say that you can never determine it and that it's only a probability and you can never predict the outcome more precise than that.

>> No.15347039

>>15346909
Weird you simultaneously recognize the place is usually filled with schizo replies, yet act baffled someone would misinterpret your intent from "trying to play the socratic method".

Anyway, whatever, good luck with that.

>> No.15347047

More like double shit experiment.

Photons are a group of atoms that you can see individually but they also move in a group of waves.

>> No.15347055

>>15347047
>photons are atoms
meds.

>> No.15347078

>>15347055
I meant particle, it is my bed time.

>> No.15347107 [DELETED] 

>>15346578
>logical contradiction is what breaks the wave function
Because paradoxes aren't possible in reality

>> No.15347169

>>15346709
>it just teleports bro
how does this make more sense than it going through both slits

>> No.15347185

>>15346578
> You are telling me that even if you shoot one electron at a time, the pattern on the wall suggests that the electron somehow went through both slits every time?
Yes.
> But when you put any kind of detector in the slits, the electrons only travel through one slit at a time, and they form a different pattern on the wall?
Yes.
> any kind of logical contradiction is what breaks the wave function
No. Any kind of measurement does, and when a physicist says measurement they mean an interaction between two particles.

> Does anybody in the scientific community understand this phenomenon at all either?
They understand it. Particles are entities that depending on the measurement performed either shows their particle-like properties or their wave-like ones. It just happens that at the macroscopic scale the only side of their nature we observe is the particle one.

>> No.15347200

>>15346588
Well that’s interesting

>> No.15347236

>>15346578
It's called wave-particle duality. I don't understand what you mean by not understanding it, it is a fact. It's like you are unsatisfied with this fact of reality. Asking 'but why...' in this particular instance is just a peculiarity of the human brain, why not ask it for any of the other phenomena the 'why' cannot be understood for which is infinite.

>> No.15347252

Since quantum states cannot exist independently of their environment, you can think of wavefunction collapse as an interaction between the environment and the particle via measurement which 'collapses' the wavefunction. However, the wave function of the environment+particle still evolves unitarily.

>> No.15347253

>>15347236
I mean, what if it extends to other things?
What if, in the initial state of the universe, there were more examples of "duality" and eventually they all collapsed and formed our universe.

>> No.15347255

>>15346578
Isn't the wall a detector? That shows which way it took? Is it then the location of the detector that matters? If it is by the slits or after?

>> No.15347265

>>15346578
>You are telling me that even if you shoot one electron at a time
Has anyone ever actually done this?

>> No.15347281

>>15347265
retard, that's the whole fucking experiment.

>> No.15347300

>>15346578
The detectors near the slits get entangled with the particle and that causes decoherence. That's all there is to it.

>> No.15347302

>>15347281
No the experiment everyone cites was done with light. This is about a thought experiment Feynman came up with. Has anyone actually performed it in reality?

>> No.15347321

>>15347302
Yes, with electrons and more: https://physicsworld.com/a/double-slits-with-single-atoms/

>> No.15347330

>>15347302
>Has anyone actually performed it in reality?
>>Durrr I'm such a retarded lazy fuck I can't even figure out why people would call me a retarded lazy fuck for asking this question
>>durrr how do I ctrl+F
>>durrrr how do I google
>>durrr how do I read thread
>>durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Do us all a favor and fuck right off out of the gene pool.

>> No.15347338

>>15347321
Do not help retards who don't read the thread. You want to encourage genuine questions from people with earnest effort, not the intellectual equivalent of the morbidly obese land whale too fucking lazy to get off the couch.

>> No.15347392

It’s me, I personally tampered with the results of every single experiment, lol

>> No.15347400

>>15346578
you are the one who doesn't understand it moron. stfu and kys retarded ape

>> No.15347408
File: 53 KB, 500x500, urmeds.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15347408

>>15347400
stfu schizo namefag, nobody needed your worthless opinion.

>> No.15347436

>>15347408
I said stfu and kys you are poor and stupid no one cares what you think about anything. You cant even get a girl to let you touch her boobs. Go back to beating off the hentai you retarded cunt

>> No.15347447

>>15347408
>stfu schizofag
>>15347436
>You cant even get a girl to let you touch her boobs

This is a prime example of why our species is doomed because we are merely evolved primates. Despite intelligence humans are blinded by primal urges. I don’t want to live anymore. I’m probably going to kill myself soon. Were stuck on a shitty planet that has no chance of exploring the universe because of how flawed this species is. Were fucking animals, we should all go back to the jungles and die. We are too stupid to realize that love is the foundation of everything, including the universe.

>> No.15347454

>>15347436
As if you have any, the only boobs you've touched are your mom's and your imaginary girlfriend.

>> No.15347456

>>15347436
Your handlers are coming to get you, schizo

>> No.15347471
File: 1.11 MB, 1366x4235, ActualSchizo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15347471

>>15347456

>> No.15347473

>>15347454
you will never touch boobs and die a virgin

>>15347447
cry me a river faggot. you want to level up? it doesnt come for free, do the work and stop asking for handouts

>> No.15347482
File: 56 KB, 635x515, EkPBpPRWsAEgc_e.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15347482

>>15347471
SILENCE, HERETIC!

>> No.15347489

>>15347473
you insulting the guy who called you a schizo shows an obvious insecurity and truth in what he said. there would otherwise be no need to be so defensive. be a man and make better comebacks. then, there would finally be something positive to put on your gravestone.

>> No.15347544

How is this difficult to understand? What is called physical world only exists on our internal screen of sensory perceptions. In other words the properties of matter only exist as soon as a consciousness instantiates them by observation. There's no magic involved. We're not changing or affecting anything about external reality by merely perceiving (lmfao). All that's happening is a background process in our mind continuously converts the stream of (non-physical) perceptual data filtered from the external world via our sensorium and constructs a physical world on our internal screen of perceptions. So the idea that the properties of matter would somehow have standalone existence outside of our conscious screen of perceptions is utterly ridiculous and really makes zero sense. Similarly ridiculous is the idea that the act of perceiving somehow changes external reality, as many people confuse our internal physical world that is rendered on our screen of perceptions for reality (lol). And as far as using detectors is concerned, lmfao...the wave function collapses because obviously a daisy chain from a conscious observer to the detector is formed.

>> No.15347564

>>15347544
You need to get outside and touch grass. Life isn't a videogame, nerd.

>> No.15347568

>>15347489
stfu schizo

>> No.15347573

>>15347047
Experiment showed otherwise

>> No.15348945

>>15347544
>In other words the properties of matter only exist as soon as a consciousness instantiates them by observation
Every interaction between things is categorized as an "observation", the universe doesn't need you to exist

>> No.15349460

>>15348945
>the universe doesn’t need you to exist
This is true, but not in the way you think. You’ve made the common but fatal error of mistaking the physical world that each of us individually renders within our own consciousness for the actual external universe that we have no direct access to. It’s like saying the pixels displaying this webpage on your monitor don’t need your monitor to exist. It makes no sense. There’s no pixels without a monitor. There’s no physical world without an internal screen of sensory perceptions. It’s true that the color of the pixels correspond to electrical charges on a silicon device on a remote server, but electrical charges on a remote server are not the pixels on your monitor.

The failure of materialism is a failure of thinking.

>> No.15350589

>>15346785
Then how do you account for the case of a single particle getting detected? What happened to the waves?

>> No.15350620

>>15346802
vgp

>> No.15350964

>>15349460
>There’s no physical world without an internal screen of sensory perceptions
The atomic and subatomic interactions _are_ perceptions

>> No.15353246

>>15346670
>Anybody can do it. You can do it yourself
nope

>> No.15353252

>>15347321
its not because of double slit or observation or whatever
its the pattern that forms when any kind of particle passes through slit with thickness, thats why single slit experiment also has these patterns, theres no other magic here you just need to do a proper simulation of it to realize it yourself

>> No.15353257

cont. the particles bounce off strong/EM force field of the slit walls, based on the direction they come from they will always deflect in these patterns for same slit sizes, and for electrons their speed also matters