this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2024
864 points (98.5% liked)

Science Memes

10348 readers
2245 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.


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
[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (5 children)

If it goes back to just two lines when you look at it, how'd they figure out there's more of them when you're not looking?

[–] [email protected] 21 points 6 months ago

Measure, not look. Measure implies interaction. That's why the result changes.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Hard to explain (in part because I'm not a scientist) but it isn't when you look at it, it's when the photon interacts with something. I'm gonna do my best, and if I'm hard to follow, that's because I suck at writing

Edit: I'm gonna keep my comment here, but Veritasium did a good job showing the wave interference in this video

Before interacting with something, a photon acts like a wave, kind of like a wave in water, or a sound wave. The wave goes through both slits at the same time, which causes it to split into multiple waves. In places where two waves meet, their magnitude is added together. That is, where the peaks of those waves meet, the peak gets higher. Where the valleys meet, they get lower. Where a peak meets a valley, they cancel each other out. The empty parts on the detector are where peaks met valleys, and there was no measurable wave in those parts.

When a photon interacts with something, it collapses from a wave to a particle, and interacts with the detector only in one spot. I've seen it compared to a speck of dust in a raindrop. Before that raindrop hits the ground, you know that the speck of dust is somewhere in the drop, but not where it is in the drop. When it hits the ground, the speck can only end up in one spot. When the wave collapses, the photon is forced to interact with the detector in only one place. The location is random, but is more likely in spots with a larger magnitude of wave. Those are the places with the spots on the detector in the top picture.

If the photon interacts with something at the slits, like a polarizing filter, it collapses before an interference pattern is able to form. No interference pattern means it ends up interacting with the detector in one of the two areas like in the bottom picture.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

Look up the double slit experiment. Then consider the characters pov.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

Look at the PBS Spacetime link someone else provided, but in this case the looking is knowing which slot individual electrons or photons go through. Thus, wave pattern when which slot is not known; random scatter pattern when you know which slot.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

It's not just looking. The implication of the person looking is he's looking at which path the light took through the slit. If you measure which slit the particle of light went through, the pattern disappears.