Could the Double-Slit Experiment Finally be Solved?
The famous double-slit experiment–a now classic showcase of how both light and matter are able to behave as both waves, and particles in their “classical” physical definition–seems almost like magic to many of us.
Because of this unusual function of our physical universe, the double-slit experiment has intrigued physicists for decades, as it suggests the possibility of multiple universes or weird quantum events. However, only recently have researchers at the Vienna University of Technology (TU Wien) found a way to fully validate this experiment, using a particular measurement method on the particle.
Background: What is the Double-Slit Experiment?
This experiment was first performed by British Mathematician Thomas Young in 1802. The experiment works by having a beam of election shoot at a screen with two vertical slits in it. The beam should go through either one slit or the other, creating a specific pattern on the wall behind them. However, in all cases of the experiment being run, the electrons go through both slits at the same time, using a property called quantum superposition.
Superposition allows for an electron’s quantum state to be in two places at once, adding up to one coherent state. As a researcher from Tu Wien, Stephan Sponar explained: “In the classical double-slit experiment, an interference pattern is created behind the double slit. The particles move like a wave through both openings at the same time, and the two partial waves then interfere with each other. In some places, they reinforce each other, in other places they cancel each other out.”
When trying to measure where a particle may be after going through the double-slit becomes a game of statistics. These statistics depend on the interference pattern of the particle, where places are amplified or canceled out by each other. This makes validating the experiment very limited. “Of course, this is not entirely satisfactory,” stated researcher Holger Hofmann from Hiroshima University, who helped develop the theory behind the experiment.
“We have therefore considered how the phenomenon of two-way inference can be proven based on the detection of a single particle.” Two-way interference is the interference that happens between two separate particle waves.
Analysis: Separating Waves
To look at two-way interferences the researchers set up a new measurement method. In this method, a neutron’s quantum wave was split into two waves, using a crystal. The two waves moved along individual paths where they then recombined and interfered with each other. The researchers measured this interference. They also “tagged” a specific wave by manipulating the angle of the particle, so they could track which wave went in which direction. From trial and error, the researchers found which angles were needed to replicate the results of the double-slit experiment.
Outlook: One Step Closer to Solving the Double Slit Experiment
“Our measurement results support the classical-quantum theory,” explained Sponar. “The novelty is that one does not have to resort to unsatisfactory statistical arguments. When measuring a single particle, our experiment shows that it must have taken two paths at the same time, and quantifies the respective proportions unambiguously.” This study offers more information about the process behind the famous experiment and allows for further research to help advance the field of quantum physics.
See more here: thedebrief.org
Header image: PC Pixabay.com
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
NicaLeon
| #
What about the third sentence in the last paragraph. MMMH
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
A single moving election will cause a change in the surrounding electric field. As it approaches an area the strength of the negative electric field increases and as it moves away the negative electric field decreases.It creates an electromagnetic wave, unlike a current that creates a new electric field.
When that electron hits a barrier its energy is absorb by the barrier and then radiated in all directs producing a spot of light.
When an opening is created in the barrier an electron can pass through it while the electromagnetic waves it has generated are blocked. The electron will continue on its path creating new electromagnetic waves until striking another barrier, being absorbed and producing a spot of light.
If a second opening is created in the first barrier close to the first opening some to the electromagnet waves created by the motion of the electron on that side of the barrier will pass through that opening creating a second source of electromagnetic waves.
The waves from the two sources will create an interference pattern on he second barrier. if a opening is covered the interference pattern disappears or if you place a detector to intercept the electron it will no longer generate new electromagnetic waves and the interference pattern will disappear. It is NOT because the experiment knows when you are watching and changes the results if you are.
Try doing he experiment with neutrons where there is no electromagnetic waves being created by the particle and see if you get the same results.
Reply
Allan Shelton
| #
I have waited for many years for a proper explanation of this controversy.
I say that Herb has the problem solved. [for me anyway]
Thanks Herb.
Reply
T. C. Clark
| #
“Try doing (t)he experiment with neutrons”? It clearly states that they did use neutrons. Maybe you should contact them and enlighten them about Herbphysics.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
The article states that the experiment was done in 1802 using electrons. The neutron wasn’t discovered until1932.
Reply
T. C. Clark
| #
It says above that the experimenters used a neutron wave. The Quantum Eraser Experiment basically results in an image of the 2 slits if the path of a photon can be traced back to the double slit while an interference pattern results if the path cannot be traced back to the origin. In the Double Eraser Experiment, 1/2 silvered mirrors are used to introduce uncertainty…it is like flipping a coin as to whether a photon is reflected or passed and this results in the interference pattern. Amazing still after all these years.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
What his a neutron wave? You are doing an experiment to determine the wave nature of a particle using a wave in a crystal? A crystal is a solid formed by ionic bonds between charges particles. A disturbance of these bonds will cause changes in the electric fields (piezo electric effect) and electric magnetic waves (crystal radios). This experiment is trying to confirm the results of the previous one by repeating the same mistakes in a different way.
T. C. Clark
| #
Herb Rose….what did Fermi Lab do when you explained to them that not only are there no neutrinos but 3 different types of neutrinos is ….just ridiculous? Fermi Lab has spent millions on neutrinos because they know nothing of Herbphysics….no?
Herb Rose
| #
T.C.
The neutrino was created by negative results. The measured energy released by radioactive decay did not matched expectations from E=mc^2. The experimental results to find it (lousy design) again did not meet expectations so the properties of the neutrino was changed. Since the new neutrino violated E=mc^2 it was again changed to include mass. If it has mass, the amount of energy expected from radioactive decay must be adjusted and all the modifications must again be modified.
The problem with creating imaginary particles to preserve theory is that they must continually be adjusted to agree with reality. (Has the flavors of quarks reached the Baskin Robbins level?)
There is no question that a particle can create waves the problem is in trying to show that the waves are a property of the particle instead of the medium in which the wave travels.
As to what those whose income and careers are based on fallacy think of my heresy I doubt they even know of it (but can guess what it would be) I don’t care.
Herb
T. C. Clark
| #
The equation E=MC^2 is for mass at rest….the earth is moving…the solar system is moving…the galaxy is moving….Dark Energy is increasing…thus the Universe is expanding….where is mass at rest? You read the story about the missing matter and the invention of the neutrino….Fermi Lab has more proof of neutrinos than Herbphysics has proof of no neutrinos. Being contrary got the sake of being contrary is…..pretty much a waste of time.
Herb Rose
| #
If nowhere in the universe is mass at rest then you are saying E=mc^2 doesn’t exist in reality. The neutrino, dark matter/energy, time dilation, increase in mass with velocity expanding universe, and all of Einstein’s theories about physics/reality are all based on on something false, which is what I’ve been saying for years.
Science advances from the disbelief of what the experts say and all experts eventually are found to be wrong.
T. C. Clark
| #
E=MC^2 is just the special case formula for mass at rest……..E^2=p^2c^2 + M^2C^4 is the formula for M in motion…..you have to add momentum if the mass is in motion. I know…it is tough…Herbphysics versus Fermi Lab physics…..but sorry, I just gotta go with Fermi Lab.
Reply
Ken Hughes
| #
In E=mc^2, “E” is the energy required to move mass “m” through time.
Lit
| #
Very nice explanation.
Reply
VOWG
| #
an iptical occlusion.
Reply
Ken Hughes
| #
It’s not particles that have a wave nature, it’s the background to everything, space time, that is wavelike. This is the way that particles can have wavelike behavior yet still be particles. I’ll say no more here, you either won’t understand it or you’ll just argue with me.
If you’re interested, read “The Binary Universe” – A Theory of Time. https://www.amazon.es/BINARY-UNIVERSE-Theory-Time/dp/0956800246/ref=sr_1_2?__mk_es_ES=%C3%85M%C3%85%C5%BD%C3%95%C3%91&crid=7P671CLIX0GN&keywords=the+binary+universe&qid=1654253646&sprefix=the+binary+universe%2Caps%2C92&sr=8-2
Reply