The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. Non Life Sciences
  3. Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology
  4. In the double slit experiment, is the observing apparatus influencing the result?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

In the double slit experiment, is the observing apparatus influencing the result?

  • 13 Replies
  • 8385 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

nicky

  • Guest
In the double slit experiment, is the observing apparatus influencing the result?
« on: 22/01/2009 09:30:01 »
nicky asked the Naked Scientists:
   
The conclusion for the double split experiment was that particles behave
differently when 'being observed' - ie it was mysteriously just the ACT
of us OBSERVING that changes particle behaviour.

Is it not possible that it was the observing APPARATUS ITSELF that was interfering with the particle behaviour & therefore the experiment ?

How exactly did they detect the respective particles (photons/electrons)- what type of apparatus did they use? No one ever questions this?


What do you think?
Logged
 



Marked as best answer by on 09/01/2019 21:40:41

Offline Chemistry4me

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 7705
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
In the double slit experiment, is the observing apparatus influencing the result?
« Reply #1 on: 22/01/2009 09:41:51 »
Why are there so many people asking about this double slit experiment?
Logged
 

Offline demadone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 112
  • Activity:
    0%
    • View Profile
In the double slit experiment, is the observing apparatus influencing the result?
« Reply #2 on: 22/01/2009 09:53:21 »
I have problems understanding the hologram theory. It sounds absurd. But I guess it deserves the benefit of a doubt.

So 3D doesn't exist? This isn't science.
Logged
 

Offline Madidus_Scientia

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1451
  • Activity:
    0%
    • View Profile
In the double slit experiment, is the observing apparatus influencing the result?
« Reply #3 on: 22/01/2009 09:56:39 »
Quote
Why are there so many people asking about this double slit experiment?

Because it's so interesting?
Logged
 

Offline Chemistry4me

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 7705
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
In the double slit experiment, is the observing apparatus influencing the result?
« Reply #4 on: 22/01/2009 10:02:38 »
Are you interested in it too?
Logged
 



Offline Madidus_Scientia

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1451
  • Activity:
    0%
    • View Profile
In the double slit experiment, is the observing apparatus influencing the result?
« Reply #5 on: 22/01/2009 10:14:24 »
It blows my mind actually
Logged
 

Offline demadone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 112
  • Activity:
    0%
    • View Profile
In the double slit experiment, is the observing apparatus influencing the result?
« Reply #6 on: 22/01/2009 10:26:11 »
In the back of my mind, when I read about the hologram theory, I was hoping they got wrong readings or that the theory is wrong. I need to find an easier explanation of the theory.
Logged
 

Offline lightarrow

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 4605
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 13 times
    • View Profile
In the double slit experiment, is the observing apparatus influencing the result?
« Reply #7 on: 22/01/2009 12:08:49 »
Quote from: nicky on 22/01/2009 09:30:01
nicky asked the Naked Scientists:
   
The conclusion for the double split experiment was that particles behave
differently when 'being observed' - ie it was mysteriously just the ACT
of us OBSERVING that changes particle behaviour.

Is it not possible that it was the observing APPARATUS ITSELF that was interfering with the particle behaviour & therefore the experiment ?

How exactly did they detect the respective particles (photons/electrons)- what type of apparatus did they use? No one ever questions this?


What do you think?
It's only ~ 80 years that physicists are discussing about these things  [:)]
When, in divulgative books or papers, they talk about 'being observed' they usually (but not always!) mean 'detected' by the apparatus.
What you say about the apparatus 'interfering' with the particle behaviour should be better expressed in this way:
"Is it possible that the real property of the particle considered doesn't exist, independently of the measuring apparatus?"
That's exactly what I think, but it's only a special kind of interpretation of QM: 'Relational Interpretation':
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-relational/
Quote
The core idea is to read the theory as a theoretical account of the way distinct physical systems affect each other when they interact (and not of the way physical systems "are")

Of course we have discussed these things a lot of times in this forum...
« Last Edit: 22/01/2009 12:12:43 by lightarrow »
Logged
 

lyner

  • Guest
In the double slit experiment, is the observing apparatus influencing the result?
« Reply #8 on: 22/01/2009 12:37:10 »
Quote from: demadone on 22/01/2009 09:53:21
I have problems understanding the hologram theory. It sounds absurd. But I guess it deserves the benefit of a doubt.

So 3D doesn't exist? This isn't science.
What didn't you get about holograms?
Logged
 



Offline LeeE

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 3382
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
In the double slit experiment, is the observing apparatus influencing the result?
« Reply #9 on: 23/01/2009 00:57:01 »
Hologram theory in what sense?  Are you questioning how holograms work, or the idea that every fragment of anything contains a representation of everything?
Logged
...And its claws are as big as cups, and for some reason it's got a tremendous fear of stamps! And Mrs Doyle was telling me it's got magnets on its tail, so if you're made out of metal it can attach itself to you! And instead of a mouth it's got four arses!
 

Offline demadone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 112
  • Activity:
    0%
    • View Profile
In the double slit experiment, is the observing apparatus influencing the result?
« Reply #10 on: 23/01/2009 08:59:20 »
I can't understand why the observed flakiness in the observed light leads to a conclusion that things are actually happening in a distant point of the universe. What is transmitting the 3D hologram and in what medium?
Logged
 

Offline lightarrow

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 4605
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 13 times
    • View Profile
In the double slit experiment, is the observing apparatus influencing the result?
« Reply #11 on: 23/01/2009 09:16:17 »
Quote from: LeeE on 23/01/2009 00:57:01
Hologram theory in what sense?  Are you questioning how holograms work, or the idea that every fragment of anything contains a representation of everything?
I think demadone is talking about the theory of the holographyc universe:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle
http://community.livejournal.com/ref_sciam/1190.html

However I don't understand what this has to do with the OP's question.
Logged
 

Offline demadone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 112
  • Activity:
    0%
    • View Profile
In the double slit experiment, is the observing apparatus influencing the result?
« Reply #12 on: 23/01/2009 09:49:49 »
Oops, my bad. I mistook the double slit experiment with something about the flakiness of split light from very distant galaxies. Sorry if I confused anyone [>:(] [;D].
Logged
 



Offline LeeE

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 3382
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
In the double slit experiment, is the observing apparatus influencing the result?
« Reply #13 on: 23/01/2009 10:47:18 »
Ah right - thanks lightarrow.
Logged
...And its claws are as big as cups, and for some reason it's got a tremendous fear of stamps! And Mrs Doyle was telling me it's got magnets on its tail, so if you're made out of metal it can attach itself to you! And instead of a mouth it's got four arses!
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 

Similar topics (5)

What does Iain Stewart's "CO2 experiment" Demonstrate

Started by Pete RidleyBoard The Environment

Replies: 61
Views: 41380
Last post 05/05/2011 13:16:21
by JP
Can carbon-14 decay and dice experiment decay results be compared?

Started by dgt20Board Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 2
Views: 1644
Last post 04/03/2018 00:03:16
by alancalverd
Blind and double blind?

Started by CorbeilleBoard Physiology & Medicine

Replies: 2
Views: 3770
Last post 01/11/2004 11:55:03
by Corbeille
Experiment suggests limitations to carbon dioxide 'tree banking'

Started by paul.frBoard The Environment

Replies: 1
Views: 3914
Last post 12/08/2007 03:01:25
by another_someone
Can NASA's STEREO Satellites confirm the Hafele and Keating Experiment?

Started by CliffordKBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 2
Views: 4691
Last post 06/01/2012 10:03:10
by CliffordK
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.16 seconds with 67 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.