The Double-Slit Experiment
Вставка
- Опубліковано 24 лип 2024
- The double-slit experiment is a classic experiment that is frequently referred to when describing quantum phenomena, so we definitely have to go over it a little bit. What happens when you pass a beam of light through a screen with two slits? What about when you send electrons through there? Or just one electron? It's crazy stuff! Check it out.
Watch the whole Modern Physics playlist: bit.ly/ProfDavePhysics2
Classical Physics Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDavePhysics1
Mathematics Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDaveMaths
General Chemistry Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDaveGenChem
Organic Chemistry Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDaveOrgChem
Biochemistry Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDaveBiochem
Biology Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDaveBio
EMAIL► ProfessorDaveExplains@gmail.com
PATREON► / professordaveexplains
Check out "Is This Wi-Fi Organic?", my book on disarming pseudoscience!
Amazon: amzn.to/2HtNpVH
Bookshop: bit.ly/39cKADM
Barnes and Noble: bit.ly/3pUjmrn
Book Depository: bit.ly/3aOVDlT
“Classical mechanics emerges from quantum mechanics.” Is such a great line. It really drives home the fact that they’re not independent of each other, but rather they act as ways at looking at physical properties at differing scopes.
I err.. shall pretend I understood whatever was being said for the last 4mins.
J D just because he didn’t understand, doesn’t mean he’s stupid.
Watch it again you'll get it
Hypothesis: This effect is because electrons and neutrons are objects with 4 spacial dimensions moving through our worlds which consist of a curled up 3 spacial dimentional world.
Think of curled up 2-D paper. When you just it from the top down you are getting multiple cuts with space in between.
We would see multiple cuts, but a machin would only messure one point of impact since it as well would exist in 4 dimensions.
This could be the reason we can't find black matter, because the interaction between the curls of our universe is what keeps it together.
Me too😹
Exactly what school taught you
Im sorry if im missing it, but why didnt you speak about how observing this changes the outcome of the experiment? Seems like the full point in the phenomenon and showing how time is sometimes not linear at small sizes.
Because this guy is an elitest part of the NWO, a moron to be frank. Doesnt talk about the most important part of t he experiment like they are meant to keep to keep it a secrete from society.
This. Why indeed. Might it be that this finding goes into a subject considered taboo by science..
the idea of extracorporal consciousness? I consider this the blind spot of main stream science...ignoring the evidence for the influence (or fundamentality) of non-physical consciousness in what we consider reality.
Why would think that observing something changes its outcome? Most likely you're misinterpreting something you've read.
@@mercurius1488 no it is based on having equipment measuring it or observing it will csuse them to act as a particle rather than a wavelength. Look into it its another weird quirck in quantum physics
@@mercurius1488except for some reason it does change it. look it up
Thank you man ! I could finally understand what I have been missing and that is the most important difference between Newtonian and quantum mechanics, in classical mechanics "the wavelength is negligible". Any popularization of quantum mechanics should start by saying this !!!!
Gerardo Moscatelli 💙
I'm reading Timeline by Michael Crichton and i couldn't understand the double-split experiment even it has illustration. Thanks for this, now i understand! I love Sci-fi books, y'all should try the book.
After googling it seems de Brolgie discovered wavelengths are inversely proportional to particle size/momentum. Helpful to know in understanding this breakdown of double slit, but very cool prof Dave! Cool to see how double slit illuminates transition from quantum to classical physics
Yeah, I was exactly asking what does wavelength mean to point-like objects.
"So this will be pretty tough, no matter how much you diet" lolol
Forget the diet, you need to be anorexic
WOW!!! Thank you so very much for your amazing videos! They are easy to follow and understand. They make learning really interesting. Your diagrams, charts and illustrations really help. Thanks again!!!
Its all good, but can you shine some light on the situation when they put the detector behind the slit and it changes? then when turned off it changed back?
You never mentioned the most interesting part of the double slit experiment. When the electrons were observed going through the slits they acted differently than when they were not observed. When the electrons were observed the interference pattern did not happen. ?
Exactly why is that huge piece often left out?
Lol, how do you think that observation takes place?... No one realises that the detector is not going to detect anything without an elementary particle interaction taking place with the very thing it's trying to detect? Therefore disturbing that particle.
Maybe you could explain this to me better. How can they tell that the light is acting as waves when it's not being observed? If there are no instruments or people observing it, then what is determining this behavior?
gold333 that’s not how it works. They left the detectors on but didn’t record the data and the result changed. What mattered was whether a human could know.
Shawn Clark, Realtor Nope.The “observation” is the thing that disturbs the wave function.Even the interaction with a photon disturbs it, so I don’t think that the universe was a huge wave function waiting to be “observed” by us the humans or any conscious life before us.We are not that important, sorry.
I sing along to your intro every time, usually when i'm at the verge of tears from not understanding the subject
Hey, Dave. Have you ever run or witnessed a "simple" double slit experiment, yourself, in a clinical setting using sophisticated modern equipment? I have a couple of very basic questions about the equipment and protocols associated with these experiments. And I think hands on experience (or witnessing with a thorough explanation) may be necessary to accurately answer them. Thanks.
i have not! that would be a cool series one day if i can get the funding, to recreate all of these classic experiments!
Wanted to ask the same. I’ll search for a video now, that shows the real experiment.
@@stefans6557 there is a veritasium video where he recreates the original 1800s experiment in a box
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Please explain the diffraction pattern when funguae travel through double slits towards light and...food. The wavelength vs slit corelation doesn't hold up there, yet...
@@81giorikas where is this evident?
This is the greatest video I’ve ever seen. So clear
What is the funnest element to play with at ambient temperature?
oh, strontium of course!
Just looked it up; that's awesome! I think Indium is pretty cool.
HUMAN FLESH :P So um ... hmmm guess that would be Carbon mostly. :) Do I win a prize?
Funnest? Pray tell of this adjective of which thou speakest...
galium is fun...
You didn't mention the part about it being unobserved and only creating a pattern of two instead of five which shows photons moving as particles. What am I missing or getting wrong?
What your missing is that reality is based on waves. Scientists are still dumbfounded by what quantum physics is trying to explain. These waves are not material and hold no material properties at the quantum level. Materialism is a lie. Nothing we call real can be regarded as real, nothing we call material can be regarded as material. The moment science takes Mike Hockney seriously is the moment the paradigm shifts and the world is changed forever.
Simply brilliant, you are doing good things for the betterment of physics education around the globe
can i know some application related to young double slit experiment
Thanks for the help! This content means a lot to me
He knows a lot about science stuff professor dave explains 😂😂😂 best intro ever
It is interference not inherence if it is a word we inherit.
😅😅😅😅😆
3:44 So much brain power in one picture
i have that image as a poster framed on my wall! it inspires me.
+Professor Dave Explains do you have that photo i would like to have it...
just google Solvay conference 1927
I freaking love that Madam Curie is in that picture. A Giant among Giants.
Gosh!!, You're RIGHT!
How can a single electron go through a double slit ? Does the distance btw the 2 slits is in the order of magnitude of the electron radius ?
You’re soo good at explaining stuff. Definitely subscribed !!!
Clean and direct explanarion! Thank you very much!
I've been trying to find anywhere online the velocity at which an electron in this experiment is traveling, so I can calculate the time dilation due to special relativity, but I can't find the velocity anywhere, and it's incredibly frusting.
Professor Dave, I have a question about the materials in the screens that have the slits in them. Do you know if Thomas Young had a definition of his screens? What materials did Maxwell use? Are the screens defined in any published paper somewhere?
I have not enough education, but have a gnawing feeling that electrons or neutrons have some sort of interaktions with electrons or atom nucleus in the screens.
10/10 video. This actually explains the double slit experiment.
What is it called when they observe something and it does something different when you observe it.
That picture of the physicists I think was around ww2. I met one of the men in that photograph I think. He was in his 90's back in about 1987. He took a class off Dr Schroedinger in 1928. This guy was from Poland visiting the US, then war broke out and he was here for the duration of the war. He told a few personal stories about some of those physicists. He was a guest lecturer at the university where I was taking physics at the time.
Professor Dave, if we perform the double slit experiment with photons in stead of particles with a rest mass like electrons, does the diffraction pattern of single photon passes through the pair of slits look the same whether you compute the diffraction pattern stripe-distance according to waves of the photon frequency or according to the quantum wave dispersion?
It's still the same wave pattern/calculation; one has to include Plank's constant to make the particle a wave, and vice versa, to make the photon a particle. But yes, it makes the same wave pattern.
Excellent explanation and visuals
great lecture, Dave; thank you!
Has anyone ever tried FAST NEUTRONS in a double slit experiment? Are the results comparable to light, electron beams & atomic nuclei or
are there any anomalous results?
cant believe dave grohl is explaining to me the double slit experiment
may I ask what is effect of velocity of electron on result of erperiment
When my interest in a totally different subject led me here, to the gem that is this channel
Was literally about to comment the same thing lol
Why does the aperture need to be roughly the same size of the wavelength?
2:42 what does it mean to say that I (a massive object) have a wavelength?
apparently we emanate energy...
Each proton neutron and electron aren’t little physical spheres, they’re magnetic and electric forces (at a wavelength/frequency) interacting with themselves and holding in atomic orbit - these forces extend up to molecules and chemistry. The forces within and between atoms give us our sense of “physicality.”
An excellent video, thanks!
Sir Roger Penrose, however, says in his 'Emperor's New Mind' (p. 303) that even when the two slits are some 300-photons away from each other, a photon still manages to produce the interference pattern. This is more startling than the animation shown here, showing that the two slits are so close to each other that a single electron, whilst behaving like a wave, easily passes through both.
"No matter how much you diet"
What a knee slapper!
Every six episodes or so he gets a hell of a zinger in there.
what would happen if you use a device which emmits Xray only instead of a measurement device after the slit, would it make a difference if it is on or off as far as there is no measurement device?
if the result is the same when the xrays are emmitet or not , (as far as i understand the measurement device uses xray), that would be unbelivable.....
On the detector screen , when an electron is detected , it still cannot get from the source to the screen faster than the speed of light. So if the detector screen is huge. Thousands of miles across, you may not see the electron for a long time or you might see in in a very short time if it hits the screen in the middle. If the electron goes completely in a horizontal direction up or down as in the video , you will never detect it.
But if the slits are smaller than the object passing through it wouldn’t light always come out as a wave? Just as the illustration?
Why is the wave only horizontal? If the slits were the same size vertically and horizontally would the wave pattern be in both directions? Or if round, in a circle?
Does sound play a part in this? I imagine the electron, or particle, would make some sound no matter how minute, and sound travels as a wave.
Can the individual particles really be treated as individual particles? With the unimaginable fast speed of travel of the particles and the short distance the particles travel isn’t it safe to say that the particle is present in the complete path in which it travels, while it exist? Acting more like a solid object extending from the particle “producer” to the back wall detector (doesn’t as a particle travels it fades from one spot in time (since light is the cosmic speed limit, doesn’t light sorta determine time) and reappears in the next spot only to fade and repeat?)?
Wouldn’t the way particles travel through space and time, and understanding such, play a huge role in evaluating this experiment? And are the fraction of a fraction of a fraction......of a second in which these particles are traveling really understood?
Just curious, in all the videos I’ve seen there is always an example of a body of water with a wave traveling towards 2 slits and the wave pattern is formed on the back wall(detector). I’ve never seen the “horizontal wave only” addressed when we are dealing with traveling particles. Sure a wave in water will make the horizontally extending wave pattern but why is light also extending horizontally, and not in EVERY direction? Would the wave pattern extend vertically if the slits were rotated 180 degrees?
Probably dumb arse questions, this experiment is just so hard to believe. Easy to see what is happening, just hard to believe.
Ever consider that a wave is only a cross sectional view of a partical moving. Consider to travel in a straight direction that one partical stays on the straight plane while the second partical is rotating around it. Hence why the particals hit the screen off side of the slit and in random order. It shows that the rotating partical has no set degree point on the 360 rotation at the time it starts to travel. Or in simple terms a moving partical is a satellite of the energy its given to travel. The laws of physics don't change, only the scale of its mass.
You'd revisit your understanding of interference. As the dude said, to get these patterns you need wave interference. A single particle moving just like that can't cause this.
What about the observational part, that changes it back into slits? The act of observing changes the outcome??
Is the single electron bigger than the two slits? The animation is not making sense to me. I heard someone say the electron passed through both not because it is bigger but because it behaves like a wave at that stages and spreads out. Which is right? I like to understand things properly.
"so this will be pretty tough no matter how much you diet" 😂😂😂😂
of all things he spoke about, you found that interesting. smh
good to see that i was not the only one laughing at that :D
He said many interesting things and you choose that? I pity you.
I have been thinking about this for years and your video... what if we are thinking about waves incorrectly. What if waves are more of a wrinkle or distortion in space time. At the quantum level, is it possible that particals themselves could travel not on waves but be distroted by fluxuations in space time and / or interfier with themselves? It's like how a surfer rides a wave but can still carve a new path or fall through the wave depending on its speed or frequency ? Just some thoughts after a few drinks 😢
Great video. Raises some questions.
1) if anyone who truly knows can you please advise on and I have NEVER ever seen explained in any double slit video, is this. When you pass a single photon or other particle through the double slit to my mind there should be absolutely nothing on the screen - why? Because to do a fair experiment you MUST aim the laser at the middle of both slits and there we have the BARRIER not a gap !! So surely the other incredible result of the experiment is that the photons path BENDS towards one of the slits so is not traveling in a straight line. Think about it, by rights the photon should hit the barrier and simply be absorbed as the barrier is huge compared to the photon aimed at it.
If in reality you aim the laser at one slit for a few photons then move its aim to the other slit etc .then it is no longer a double slit experiment but a single slit experiment. The electron is not deciding at all which slit to go through, you are by default aiming at one of the slits.
WHY does not a single physicist explain this? Why has everyone missed this obvious point ? And of course what is the answer?
2) could the observed phenomenon be something to do with the source of the particles - i.e. if we fire single electrons what if inside the laser the electrons are already linked as a wave. So on firing them out singly in reality they are still in wave form with each other?
Has anyone tried these experiment but with 2 sources of electrins? And very spread out in time e.g. one electron per hour?
Okay so is it possible that the particle itself isn't acting like a wave but the speed at which the particle is traveling causes spacetime to ripple that way and then the particle just Rides The wave in spacetime?
Well done!
If -the sensor detecting where the photons are splitting- displays a number on a gauge and people are looking at the gauge, will the amount of people looking at the gauge determine how fast the spreaded beam turns into a non-spreaded beam of light? And if so, would it be possible to measure the time that it takes every 1 second to create a device that would be able to measure how much the said gauge is being observed? An observatometer if you will.
I’d like to do this experiment myself. Does anybody know where I can buy a bag of electrons?
it is always hitting the detection region it's a mono operation interference exist however and result of which slit it went erases the quantum information how?
1:00 that's interesting, you're actually the first person I've heard explain it mentioning the width of the bands being a function of the frequency of the wavelength of light.. it's a little aggravating when ppl explaining it assume their audience all have PhDs just like they do lol sometimes we need that extra detail, and usually I prefer it all the time
How do we compute the wavelengths of massive objects though?
Well explained !!!
cant help but think of the wave beam from Metroid Prime. is that weird?
Finally understood the YDSE
Thanx sir
I subscribed your channel
It's only half the expirement.. research observer effect.
2:46 You knew exactly what we were thinking lmao
If an electron passeS through slit then how it cam appear at two places?I mean that the numbers of electrons on the right side will be ×2 of shooted electrons.Isnt it?
It goes through as a wave.
do you think someday there will be another theory that explains more about the universe, breaking both classical and modern phsyics?
who knows!
I'm curious I would like to see an experiment where they add more measuring devices and instead of just having one in the front have one behind the two discs and one in each slit and have them where you can turn them all off and on at different intervals and try them all out and see what happens ? For example if they had the one in front and one behind the disc turned off but the two in each slit turned on I wonder if sometimes it would split into two and that way they could prove it that's one atom split into two or more ??? That would be cool I'd love to see a video on that and see if they could do that which I believe fully that they can.
Google double slit quantum eraser experiment.
I like how dave dismisses many worlds and pilot wave theory
Does an electron loose mass after diffraction?
What i find strange is that when it comes to making computer chips especially the photolithography step of the process that this Double-Slit phenomenon does not occur to mess up the tiny tiny microarchitecture of the chip that is being lensed down onto the Silicon wafer.
Light is not involved in that process tho
Yes it is involved tho. youtube this video here Photolithography: Step by step @@WaterBuizel
You can't see an atom.
Could it just be the math involved in "measuring" them is wrong.
i.e. Schrodingers equation, heisenbergs uncertainty principle, plank measurements etc
the math is just a description, or model, of an observation. the observation is the spooky part, not the math itself
Great video professor
But how can you explain the different behaviour of photons when it's observed?
It’s amazing how he glossed over that MAJOR component of this experiment . Purposeful I’d say as he wouldn’t have a clue how to explain it.
What's 'die fraction'? Is it the same as 'diffraction'?
It is said that light waves propagate due time varying electric field( which produces time varying magnetic field ). From sun to earth, is it that electric field exit for light to travel and reach earth. If yes, how ? (Because both sun and earth are nurtral bodies and there are no charged bodies either in the surrounding ) and is this field the same as coulomb electric field?
It's the same thing as the coulomb electric field, but in a different form. The electric field of light propagates with the magnetic field through space, while the coulomb electric field is stationary, because it is formed by a stationary electric charge. If you'd start accelerating the charge, it would start producing electromagnetic fields which move through space, i.e. light.
Electromagnetic waves are produced by particles with charge, but after they've been produced, they simply travel through space, and it doesn't matter whether the objects between which the light travels have a charge or not.
Thank you for sharing your content! 📚 ❤🎉
for the double slit experiment, the fluorescent screen is essentially a 1D measuring device, and that's why we only see the 'point' of the particle as it passes into/through the screen. What if you made that 'screen' a 3D box or trap...maybe like a cloud chamber, but something more permanent - that could literally show/record the path of the wave/particle as it passes through it? then you should see the full wave like behavior of the photon or whatever as it passes through.
@@schmetterling4477 what is wrong with my proposal? A measurement is A record of change over time or of a static position at a given point in time
Dave, great video but let me propose something. The key to solving this whole baffling double slit experiment comes down to particle trajectory. Science believes you can’t make something macroscopic like a tennis ball have quantum wave like properties but I believe you can. Here's how to make a macroscopic particle like a tennis ball have wave like properties like a photon in the double slit experiment and why photons “appear” to lose their wave properties when observed - it all comes down to trajectory. One water molecule cannot make a wave-of-water and a trillion-trillion water molecules cannot make a wave-of-water if all the molecules follow the same trajectory. When a 500 nm wavelength photon is emitted through a double slit (with the slit material being 1mm thick) the slit plays out as a tunnel because it is approximately 2,000 times longer than the photon's wavelength. By quantum law - an electron in its molecular orbit will have a cloud like location probability - therefore the probability of a photon being emitted from an electron's orbit at the same place twice is highly unlikely. This means when photons are emitted from a stationary atom/molecule each photon has a high probability of having their own unique trajectory. Hence, when photons are shot through the slit/tunnel in the double slit experiment each respective photon will hit, bounce, and ricochet off the inside of the slit/tunnel at a different location. This means all the photons will exit the slit/tunnel with slightly different trajectories and consequently impact the back-wall in a "wave" like pattern representative of the electron's orbital location cloud. So how do we get all the photons emitted from slightly different locations with slightly different trajectories to hit the back-wall in the same spot? Simple - we observe them. In other words the act of observing/measuring a photon doesn't necessarily collapse its intrinsic wave property but our observing/detecting device due to its fixed location will "funnel" or “shute” all the different photon trajectories into a singular common path/trajectory before they enter the slit/tunnel. And if all photons enter the slit/tunnel with identical trajectories then they will all exit with identical trajectories and impact the back-wall in the same spot. The shute/funnel consequence is the same when we place our detection device after the slit. So if we want macroscopic tennis balls to produce wave like properties we would need to set up our double slit tennis ball experiment in similar ways - and proportions - to our double slit photon experiment. A tennis ball is approximately 2.575 inches in diameter. Therefore, the board for our tennis ball slits would need to be approximately 430 feet thick (2,000 x 2.575") - I’m thinking far less would suffice. We would also have to make our tennis ball shooter have a randomized cloud location like an electron’s molecular orbit. This will give the tennis balls random trajectories but because of the shooting apparatus’s electron cloud location mimicking nature - high, low and no probability trajectories will emerge and the tennis balls will eventually produce wave like patterns where the tennis balls strike the back-wall. But again, it’s not the tennis balls themselves that have the wave like properties - it’s the electron cloud like location property of the tennis ball shooter giving the tennis balls many different trajectories of high, low and no probability which along with the mathematical corralling nature of the slit/tunnels produce wave like patterns. Just my two cents. Thx.
mads respect mate, you really need to be smart to even memorize all these informations let alone understand them
Hm, kinda makes sense. (or at least seems to)
@@alexioschaffan consider the center of an atom at coordinate (1, 1) and a photon approaching said atom up the y-axis with trajectory (2, 0). The frequency of the photon is such that it can be absorbed by the atom. Because the photon (as an emf wave) has a width greater than the diameter of the atom and beyond its (1, 1) coordinate it does not have to have a (1, 0) trajectory to be absorbed by the atom. All that is required is that the photon has sufficient overlap interaction with the atom to absorb it. Thus, the atom has the ability to funnel or shute the photon off its original trajectory (2, 0) to its coordinate of (1, 1).
@@alexioschaffan a photon absorbing atom has the ability to pull a photon off its trajectory. Thus, a device used to “observe” all the emitted photons with slightly different trajectories (which causes the wave pattern on the back wall) is pulling all them to a single point with the observation device thereby destroying, or collapsing, the wave pattern to a single point.
What are the practical implications of this?
beautifully explained congrats dear professor 👋🏻👋🏻👋🏻
This is so easy to understand. When I was in college (physics major) I had such a hard time understanding my professors. I'm finally learning this stuff for the first time. THANK YOU!
Samee.. With no pressure of assignment & exams, physics looks so wonderful.
Btw did you choose a career in physics?
Sir please make a video on solid state in chemistry
Very good explanation
So both electrons (and i guess any bit matter small enough) and light exhibit duality?
Yep, I mean technically everything does but only for things as small as subatomic particles is the wave behavior significant.
Love this experiment! I think everyone should be at least familiar with it!!!
Thanks, Dave.
The most important points, the observation and the rays where left out. Which are held that quants stay in solid static state.
Like Einsteins Question: "Is the Moon not there when we don't look at it ?"
Sure it is there since in case of Rays which are every where present in the universe and which force the quants into their static state bc they are measured now.
We have evidence that things exist when we don't look at them... And in fact, experiments suggest otherwise.
Out of all the talk on double slit experiments, I have never heard anything about how electrons or light interact with the material of the slits. I am use to using RHEED/LEED (electron diffraction) in semiconductor manufacturing, where the reflection pattern off the atomic latice of a material builds up 1 electron at a time (nothing 'spooky'). Similarly, could the double-slit be the same with the patterns just being the electron reflection/diffraction off the atomic lattice of the edges of the slit material?
Then you get an ‘interference’/build-up envelope from the 2 electron patterns from 2 slits. If it is just electron reflection/diffraction off the atomic lattice of the slit material, then even if one electron at a time, you naturally get a gradual build-up of a reflection/diffraction pattern off the atomic lattice. Nothing mysterious. Maybe no need for some 'spooky' quantum explanation?
Also, on the ‘measurement destroys interference pattern‘ issue, I think it has been shown in recent years (by an Italian group) that when an atom/electron detector is there, usually in front of the slit, it of course disturbs such electron scattering, so the interference pattern changes (it seems if electron has inelastic scattering with detector, pattern changes. If elastic scattering with detector, pattern doesn’t change). Again, for measurement, seems nothing 'spooky', probably like a detector naturally disturbs a tennis ball’s trajectory.
Any papers with experimental evidence of any effects on the electrons from the atomic lattice of the slit material?
Thank you Schmetter. It is the same answer I got 30 years ago. However, it does not answer the question of, if it is just electron scattering off the atomic lattice of the slit material (as like in RHEED, you do get an electron diffraction pattern of the atomic lattice when you fire electrons at a material).
In the case for electrostatic, rather than material slits, it is a totally different physical system, so you need to know the exact physical system and go through dozens of potential causes (scattering off electrodes etc.), before jumping to exotic (spooky) explanations.
In science, rather than such ‘hand-waving’ explanations (that many of the theoretical physicists do), you need to check out the exact physical experimental system. Again, thank you.
Schmetter, Thanks. Sounds like the argument of a theoretical physicist. Just because it is a similar result, without looking at the experimental setup. There is still matter in these systems, like the positive electrode sitting in the center of the electron pathway in these electron biprisms. So still maybe diffraction off the center or side electrodes, or maybe like the raster scan lines of the good old cathode ray TVs, or maybe interference of magnetic fields (rather than electron interference)....... There must be papers that have gone though this issue.......?
lmao nerds fighting in the comment section.
No, because as I know, it gets even spookier. You can put the sensors BEHIND the slits and you get the same result, as the electrons know, that they gonna be detected in the future. That is absolutely spooky for me.
Thanks. I don't see anything spooky. Even with the detector behind the slit, the detector should deflect the electron trajectory as that Italian group showed. If electron has inelastic scattering with detector, pattern changes. If elastic scattering with detector, pattern doesn’t change. Should be the same with tennis balls.
Can you please explain how one can isolate and shoot just one electron at a time?
I thought electrons are mostly “fields” and Not an “item” that can be isolated individually.
Certainly electrons are discrete particles, otherwise the field of chemistry would not exist. As to how they fire individual electrons, I believe it's just beta decay, though I don't know how they direct it like a gun, I'm no engineer.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains cyclotron
2:12 how can a single electron pass through two slits simultaneously?? no one has been able to answer this. it's way to small to do so. is it fair to say an electron and photon are particles which EMIT waves?
GREAT JOB!
Is there any theory which explains both wave and particle nature of light ? Who first came of with the idea of duality , is it De Broglie? Please explain.
it was einstein, photoelectric effect. i have a tutorial on it
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Thank you sir but doesn't photoelectric effect explain light as particle ? How does it explain light as wave ?
well there is other behavior that continues to rely on a wave model to explain, refraction, diffraction, etc. the particle model does not replace the wave model.
Thank you Dave! Now I can get my positive energy and chakras up!
When we are aiming the electrons individually at one of the splits and shooting, how can any of the electrons go through the other split?
that's just it, because an electron is also a wave!
I mean when we are observing it passing through the split; when it is behaving like a particle, not as a wave. When we are aiming and shooting, it has to travel in a straight line I believe, and can only pass through that split at which we are aiming. And how can it sometimes NOT pass through the split but bounce off the wall as if we are not aiming at the split properly or the electron is not going in a straight line (I don't know if I am missing something.)
@@bharathp7974 when we observe which slit it passed through... It no longer behaves as a wave; and no longer makes a diffraction pattern. It behaves like a particle... If we observe which slit it went through. It behaves like a wave only if we Don't observe which slit it went through. (As if it knew it was being watched. Hehe) The problem isn't that you're missing something; it's that you're trying to make it make sense. And it doesn't; at least not directly.
@@bharathp7974 It cannot be observed (measured) going through both. It cannot also not be aimed precisely. If not measured it passes through both as a wave. If measured it collapses the wave and it only passes through one.
Hey. I have a question. How an electron transforming into waves while passing through the two slits?Does the whole mass of an electron transforming into waves?
it's tough to answer! different interpretations of quantum mechanics would answer that question differently. but it seems to be the case that the electron doesn't transform into a wave while passing through the slits, it is that the electron is always a wave. the double slit experiment just illustrates the wave behavior of the electron.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Please, is the wave nature also analogous to something vibrating side to side (or in alignment to random axes) such the central overlapping part is what we observe manifestating as particle?
I saw a discussion somewhere explaining wave length with that analogy. So, just trying to wrap my head around the particle aspect of the wave behaviour from what you said that the particle is most likely a wave than it is a particle (I guess in the sense of something that can cause observable physical impact no matter how minute in size).
Another great video! What I understood was (almost)totally wrong.
helpful !
So, the double slit experiment does not prove that electron is a particle nor it show anything about wave particle duality?
Thanks man 😊
this was by far the best description of quantum mechanics i have ever seen and i still have no fuckin idea what it is
Thank you!
Can someone explain to me why the photoelectric effect shows light to be a particle?
Check the earlier video in this series on the photoelectric effect.
Dave Grohl's brother.
I literally can sit and watch different videos about the double slit theory all day! ❤ (and do at times)
Can you recommend a good one that shows that the act of observation in itself, influences how the particles behave?
Thank you.