http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGcSomeone who's studied physics please confirm that this is not bullshit.
None.
Haven't studied physics, but most of this experiment was mentioned in a Michael Crichton book I read (Timeline). I don't recall the observation part, though.
None.
Yes it is correct. It's known as wave function collapse and it's damned weird. Quantum mechanics boggle the mind, truly.
We did this at GCSE level physics, but obviously not in detail.
None.
Yeah, it's weird, but it's legit. What's striking the wall is the sum of two different wavelengths. If they're in phase with each other when they reach the wall, they'll stack up (constructive interference) and create a bright fringe, if they're out of phase with each other when they reach the end, they'll cancel each other out (destructive interference) and have a dark fringe.
100% legit stuff.
Not sure it is "quantum physics", but it for sure is "modern physics" since its about waves.
I have an exam right about this tomorrow: kind of funny.
None.
What I was more concerned with was that having an observer forces an outcome. It's very strange, I wonder if somehow the observer is making a difference in the waves, rather than it being the universe going "someone is watching." Crazy stuff.
None.
By the way, if you want more info about that Double Slit Experiment, search for "Young's experiment".
And I'm not quite sure about this, but here's my guess: by observing something on the micro-scale, you place yourself in its direct environment. Your presence, and even mass, has an effect on it.
That's a very basic thought, though.
None.
Yeah, the act of measuring or observing affects the interaction somehow. What payne said. It's related to Schrodinger's Cat and multiple Universe theories.
None.
The only way you can detect something is by hitting it.
The bigger question:
Is it probability? Or intensity?
And what's the difference?
Actually, this makes me wonder if there have been slit-tunneling experiments. Where you put one slit and one thin barrier or something. I don't think they would add much knowledge to anything but they would be interesting to see. Phase differences could be used to analyze the barrier somehow.
http://rugth30.phys.rug.nl/quantummechanics/movies/qmb17.mpgVideo of single slit that is blocked on one side. (So there is actually no slit, just a wall that gets thin in one spot.)
Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Apr 6 2011, 1:23 am by Rantent.
None.
The only way to detect electrons is to do so with light, since light is absorbed in quanta by electrons, doing so alters it. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle expands upon this. If we had a way to detect the electron without actually affecting it, then things would become much more clear.
None.
It's legit. I think it has something to do with the wave-particle duality.
None.
The only way to detect electrons is to do so with light
Not true, light is only a common means. Neutrons, electrons, magnetic fields are other common means. Really, anything can be used as a detector, but it has to interact with what your looking at. Interacting means that it changes it though.
None.
Apparently "weak measurement" makes new things possible:
New Experiment
None.
xkcd's forums have a science section that has a bunch of stuff regarding quantum phenomena and pretty much everything else sciency.
Here is a good thread from there regarding quantum stuff. It's by no means the only one.
None.