Anybody have ideas about the double slit experiement with particles, how they react based on a human mind observing them? (page 3)

EndofMysteries

I didn't mean a human eyeball visually watching which changes it's behavior, but the fact that a human mind knows when it tells the sensors to record the data vs not record the data. A mind is involved in hitting record, which could be what forces it to behave the way that is expected.

It's like if somebody walks off a cliff, no matter how much they try to trick themselves, they KNOW deep down they will fall.

I am curious though, I wonder what would happen if instead of the scientists telling the sensors to record or not, if they programmed a computer to randomly record and not record sessions, so that nobody knows if it's recording or not, what would be the results of the experiment?

John_Mann

I am curious though, I wonder what would happen if instead of the scientists telling the sensors to record or not, if they programmed a computer to randomly record and not record sessions, so that nobody knows if it's recording or not, what would be the results of the experiment?

But that's what exactly happens! As I told is an experiment by trial and error, it's repeated a lot of times until a result is made (we just turn on the machines and go out to coffee). We don't have (yet) the ability to manipulated fundamental particles in a high precision way. This experiment it's like fishing that's the reason we call it "trap" and not "Hashi".

Terry

I have a son whose every photograph contains a weird smirky sideways smile.

We all ask him not to do it, but he says he can't help himself. The act of posing in front of a camera makes him self-conscious.

There is an analogy here if we look hard enough. . .

To be a good student you must bring curiousity and intellectual honesty with you.

To be a good teacher you must be aware that your student may have emotional and superstitious baggage standing in the way.

There are lousy students, of course. There are certainly awful teachers.

As far as the double-slit experiment, know this.

In the act of measuring something you TOUCH IT, affect it, influence it, disturb it . . .your measuring process has tampered the result.

If I say to you: ACT NORMAL. . .you suddenly find it awkward because your sudden self-awareness creates a feedback disturbing what is "normal".

The moral of the story?

Scientists use disruptive instruments which bounce photons or electrons off a wave/particle.

Waves or particles behave "normal" until that happens.

John_Mann

In the quantum scale there's no time and space, so the effects (measure) happens before the causes (particle).

The particle appears from the wave function through the act of measure.

In the metric world it's impossible to measure something that's not there yet. Even if you try to throw balls in the air at random it will not produce something. But in quantum realm it's different.

If you want to catch a quantum fly (particle) with chopsticks (photons) all you need to do is snap (measure) into air and suddenly a fly will appear on it. LOL

snare&racket

The photons are travelling by all possible routes all at once, i.e. in this experiment, both slits at the same time.

By measuring you isolate that one route and in that sense you are seeing through one window onto the process, but there are other perspectives by measuring elsewhere by different means.

Be careful to not allow a lack of information in a huge and complicated topic that takes years to understand by very smart physics people, become a validation for things that are untrue. This is not magic, woo, mind controlling matter or any kind of pseudo-science. The science is there, its being done, it is old data (Rutherford in Manchester 100+ years ago) and long 'understood' by science. Though there is more to learn and there is an importance in having an open mind, it is more important to not guess, fill in the gaps, make assumptions about the findings, especially if there is a non scientific, religious, belief element to the ideas. The only thing that should steer a theory is the collectiom of evidence.

This stuff is fascinating and worth exploring for its own merit, the real science is so much more amazing than anything you can imagine or have been told/read.

Schroedingers cat explains this state/ situation well, take a peek at that ...

Billy the Ex-Bethelite

I guess I'm not understanding why some people think that QM is a spiritually awakening experience.

The QM classes certainly didn't provide me any insight about the meaning of life, how to find true love, when armageddon is coming, is it ethical to own slaves, etc. And youtube videos like this just discuss some introductory theory without going into the math.

Just discussing theoretical physics without the math is like discussing disease without understanding viruses and the other "nuts and bolts" of how disease spreads. What happens when people only understand a little about illness and diseases? "Birth defects are because of the sin of the mother or the sins of the baby in the uterus. And seizures are caused by demon possession." Yeah, those ancient Jews taught by Jehovah really were medical geniuses.

If QM was supposed to teach me about god, then my classes about biology and biochemistry also taught me about god. You know, like this picture tells me a lot about god:

snare&racket

EndofMysteries

"terry" = if you do more research into that experiment, they then did it using the sensors and having them turned on, but just having the tape or the record feature turned off so it wouldn't record the data. When they did that so they couldn't see how the particles would shoot and what direction, it did the random chaotic pattern. When the sensors still turned on then recorded so they could analyze, it then went in a straight line as would be expected.

So they used the measuring instrument in both cases, the only variable was if it was recorded or not. The record feature did not at all touch or interfere with it.

adamah

A very important point which EOM seemingly is overlooking is that the particles in question in the double-slit experiment are in fact photons, the very particles which are detected by the photoreceptors in your eyes, allowing you to see! Hence, the particles cannot be observed or recorded indirectly, since they ARE the very particles which leads to seeing. So when photons strike the sensor of a detecting/recording device (or an object, etc) they are changed by the interaction, giving up some of their energy in the interaction.

The effect is even observable on a macroscopic level: if you line your room with blue wallpaper, everything inside of the room containing a single source of light (a lightbulb, a photon generator) will tend to be colored blue. The presence of the wallpaper in the room changes the wave functions of the photons. Differential absorption of photons on objects is the very basis of our explanation of color vision (where all photons are absorbed, aside from those possessing the wavelengths such that they're reflected, and can thus enter your eye).

That's why photons are said to display the property of duality, showing very wave-like properties under some conditions (eg by their susceptability to gravitation forces, which Einstein predicted, where the effect was later confirmed during a solar eclipse in 1919; refraction also shows that photon behavior relies on properties associated with waves), while ALSO displaying properties of particles with mass under other conditions (eg by showing the photoelectric effect, or their interaction with cones in the eye which leads to vision).

http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/ast123/lectures/lec06.html

The double-slit experiment has NOTHING to do with demonstrating proofs of Gods' existence.

adamah

Oh, on this:

EOM said- That's just crazy, that if the particles are being monitored and data recorded, they act exactly as we 'think' they should act. However if they are not being monitored and no way to watch them, then they act completely different and more random.

This leads to possibilities that our minds shape the realities we see. Could the above experiment explain how faith works or how one could move mountains if they had enough faith?

That's an astute observation, but I think what the experiment actually demonstrates is a warning of how scientists have to be careful of the dangers of over-reliance of committing pre-selection bias (i.e. designing experiments in a manner to demonstrate the conclusion they wish to reach), as well as a warning against committing the logical fallacy of exclusion of all other alternatives.

That point was made dramatically when the photon's dualistic nature was discovered when one camp of physicists conducted experiments to suggest the photon was a particle, and the other group conducted experiements that showed it followed the principles of wave: as it turns out, BOTH groups were correct, and science was advanced as a result of not sticking dogmatically to one's beloved theory above all other evidence.

Adam

Anybody have ideas about the double slit experiement with particles, how they react based on a human mind observing them?

Share this