Why Quantum Physics is Cool Pt. 4 (Big DL)
Created on: October 3rd, 2006
Continuation of http://quantumiscool1.ytmnd.com/
None ( ._.)
Sponsorships:
| user | amount | user | amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| No one has sponsored this site ( ._.) | |||
| Sponsor this site! | Total: $0.00 | Active: $0.00 | |
Vote metrics:
| rating | total votes | favorites | comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| (4.18) | 792 | 111 | 295 |
View metrics:
| today | yesterday | this week | this month | all time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 45,136 |
Inbound links:
Well, the interference pattern is a result of the particle interfering with itself, or more accurately, its probability wave interfering with itself. Every dot in that interference pattern is one single particle, each particle only makes one dot. But after thousands of dots we see that something causes them to land as if they were traveling in waves.
I looked at it again, and theres something that bothers me. You put the detectors 5 lightyears away, but the photons are travelling at lightspeed. In their frame of reference it wont be 5 years from the moment the interference pattern is detected it will be instantaneous. Plus you cannot change the detectors 5 lightyears away before the photons get there. YOU cannot send any signal there faster then the photons or any message whatsoever, so that way it makes sense.
It might take a sh*tload of time, but you should also factor in theoretical physics/multiple universe theories. What if this is just a parallel universe/branch of a universe that has seen the exact same results most of the time? It's like if you flip a coin 500 times, and they all end up heads. You can't just assume that the coin will always come up heads.
Usually the rule of thumb for posting text that is scrolling or changing is that the author should be able to read it about 3 times before it changes on the screen, so that when the viewer reads it (for the first time) it gives them enough time to read it. Your video did not do that and therefore made it hard to watch. Please update ands low it down. Also if you could, explain some terms that you used as if we have never heard them. Thank you, this is interesting stuff!
Excuse my ignorance, the farthest I went in school is Grade 11 and I have no real background in any of this, aside from an interest, but wouldn't this make perfect sense? The act of determining which path it took eliminates the possibility that it took the other in our specific dimension or density or whatever you want to call it. We've narrowed it down to one point of reference, whereas it would still be able to do either, or both if we took no measurement. I'm not quite sure if I'm being clear enough =\
If the pattern on the detector can be influenced by a future decision, is it possible to influence the past by this (ex: Rig the detector to a door that only opens when there is not an interference pattern)? Conversely, does this mean we have no free will in the situation, as the pattern will determine whether the results are observed or not?
Spooky stuff. 5'd for science.
No this wouldn't work. You'd have to send some kind of signal to the detector to open up, and whatever signal you send would get their after the particles since they're traveling at the speed of light. The best you could do is rig the detectors to open or move away at a certain time regardless of what happens with the experiment, in which case the electrons would know that it was going to move away eventually and you wouldn't be able to detect their path.
So, if I performed this experiment (mind you, it has never been performed because five lightyears is impossible, but for the sake of argument let's go back to part 3's example experiment, which used the eraser sheet), and I removed the eraser sheet without looking at it, would the results of the experiment change before my eyes if I destroyed the eraser sheet and continued to watch the wall? If time is irrelevant to the fired electrons, then shouldn't I see the paper change before my eyes, as if by magic?
I'm not sure exactly what you are asking but I will try to explain to perhaps help you answer your own question. Yes yime is irrelevant, however whether the path was detected or not is very relevant. So whatever you do , be it destroy data you haven't looked at, or changed the methods of detection, the particles that were detected on the ending wall you are looking at will result in a noninterference pattern if their path was, is or ever will be known.
That blows my mind.....holy sh*t.
So if you launch the protons with that experiment down the 2 paths though....and it lands in an interference pattern, whats stopping you from going down the line and adding detectors. they've already landed in the interference pattern. how would you collapse the wavelength then?
Curiously, what can be considered an "observer" as far as a photon is concerned? Would a layman, who cannot interpret the meaning of the data still collapse the interference pattern? Or what if the only thing able to view the data of the photon's position is electron is a cat, will the interference pattern still collapse? Does the observer need to be a conscious person? Even though the cat can see the data, it cannot understand, or tell anyone what it saw. What exactly constitutes "knowing"?
What if it's cause we live in a virtual world, and the world is like a mmorpg with "optimization" technology. The particles that you do not observe are considered unimportant, and so their path is randomized in order to save the CPU some work, while the particles that you do observe are important and so their location is specific.
Bold
Italic
Underline
Code
User Link
Site Link