Two-slit experiment details please

Discussions on classical and modern physics, quantum mechanics, particle physics, thermodynamics, general and special relativity, etc.

Two-slit experiment details please

Postby JustAsking on September 8th, 2018, 2:14 pm 

I'm trying to learn more about the infamous two-slit experiment. Every example I read about or see on youtube starts out with "if we shoot a single particle at the screen". And the conclusion always seems to be that the best explanation is the particle acts like both a particle and a wave. And the interpretation is that there isn't really a particle or a wave, just a set of probabilities of locating the particle in any particular region. Ok fine. But if that's the case, then how is it known that a single particle is being shot at the screen?

I'm sure I'm missing something, but this seems equivalent to: ok take a classical particle that's like a pool ball. Shoot it at the screen... etc. Well that sounds like somebody wants their cake and to eat it too. What am I missing? How is it known that precisely one particle is being shot?
JustAsking
Forum Neophyte
 
Posts: 9
Joined: 08 Sep 2018


Re: Two-slit experiment details please

Postby Event Horizon on September 8th, 2018, 7:54 pm 

It is not infamous. I dunno where you got that idea from. It's a simple experiment that's been replicated many thousands of times.
It demonstrates electron duality. From that it was discovered that other particles have duality. Photon duality is well covered in innumerable papers.

It is not necessary to fire just one electron when a stream will exhibit the same duality.

If someone would like to elaborate?
User avatar
Event Horizon
Member
 
Posts: 402
Joined: 05 Mar 2018
Location: England somewhere.


Re: Two-slit experiment details please

Postby bangstrom on September 8th, 2018, 9:00 pm 

If you fire a stream of electrons at the double slit, the slit separates the the stream into two smaller streams and one stream interferes with the other because of their close proximity. This demonstrates the wavelike nature of electrons. This is easily understood.

The “notorious” or bizarre aspect of the experiment is observed when particles are fired at the slit one at a time and the same interference pattern develops over time. This calls into question the previous explanation because it is difficult to imagine how a particle can also act as a wave, even more difficult to explain, is how a single particle can interfere with itself unless it passes through both sides of the slit at the same time.

To add to the confusion, the interference pattern only forms when the slit is not observed. The interference pattern does not develop if the electron is observed to pass through one side of the slit or the other even if both slits remain open. An electron can either pass through one slit or the other but, if we know "which way" it went, the pattern does not form. Any knowledge of "which way" information destroys interference.
bangstrom
Member
 
Posts: 572
Joined: 18 Sep 2014


Re: Two-slit experiment details please

Postby JustAsking on September 9th, 2018, 8:05 am 

Thanks bangstrom, but I don't think you answered my question. I'm asking, in the bizarre case where particles are fired one at a time, how is it known that a single particle is being fired?
JustAsking
Forum Neophyte
 
Posts: 9
Joined: 08 Sep 2018


Re: Two-slit experiment details please

Postby TheVat on September 9th, 2018, 11:00 am 


I think there's a bit of confusion here. The double-slit experiment was not performed with "single photons" - it's very hard to even consider what that would mean. At its heart, it is a thought experiment, and it's not really possible to make a real-life device that tests it.

The first low-intensity experiment (Taylor 1909) was challenging the EM field interpretation of photons - the idea was that if photons were localised concentrations of the EM field, as you lowered the intensity, there would be no photons to interfere with each other, and the diffraction pattern would disappear. When the experiment was low-intensity enough that Taylor couldn't distinguish between photons emitted and photons absorbed, he noted that the diffraction pattern still exists, so the photons couldn't just be localised concentrations of the EM field. Dirac had a different explanation - he considered that each individual photon was capable of interacting with itself.

Later, the experiments were repeated not with light, but rather, electrons. Electrons are a lot more convenient than photons, since they obey the Pauli principle: it makes a lot more sense to say "an electron here, an electron there". And you can emit individual electrons, which was first tested in 1974, and it was found that individual electrons do in fact display the same interference pattern. Later, it was found that the same pattern also appears for atoms and complex molecules (the current "world record" has the experiment done with a molecule with more than 800 atoms, at ~10 000 atomic weights; the experiment gets much harder with bigger "particles", since it requires much more precision). But we'll stick to electrons, since they're quite convenient.

Emission of individual electrons is still quite tricky, but they have a few important properties. They carry a charge, and they have mass. Both of these can be measured, and while this does disturb the electron (change its trajectory), it doesn't absorb it. Photons, on the other hand, will be absorbed by any measurement, which makes them tricky to deal with.

So you can measure with precision to individual electrons how many electrons were emitted from your emittor, and how many were absorbed on the detection surface. More importantly, you can try experimenting with what happens when you measure the electrons on the way between the emittor and the detector - and that's when real quantum phenomena come in.


(clipped from physics MB)
User avatar
TheVat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 7060
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills
Faradave liked this post


Re: Two-slit experiment details please

Postby hyksos on September 9th, 2018, 1:20 pm 

What am I missing? How is it known that precisely one particle is being shot?

Light has a frequency and an amplitude. A single frequency is used for these experiments, thus they are using a laser. "Amplitude" is how bright the light is.

In double-slit mock ups in a lab, you are firing a laser with the lowest possible amplitude. In other words these experiments are very very dim laser light.

There is a cut-off point where you know you must be firing less energy than a single photon would carry. (this energy cut-off scales with the frequency) You can make the amplitude of the laser even lower than this limit. When you do so, your laser is firing a single photon at intervals of time. You can make the laser so dim that it is firing one photon every 2 seconds.

The single photon falls upon a collection apparatus called a photodiode avalanche detector. This chip starts from the disturbance of a single photon and ratchets it up through a series of more powerful voltages (fed by an external electricity), until the voltage is high enough that it causes an amplifier to make a "tick" sound. For very dim laser light, the individual "ticks" are caused by a single photon being absorbed.

Optics people call these things SPADs. (Single-photon avalanche diode)

Image

http://www.everyphotoncounts.com/spad.php
User avatar
hyksos
Active Member
 
Posts: 1605
Joined: 28 Nov 2014
Faradave liked this post


Re: Two-slit experiment details please

Postby JustAsking on September 12th, 2018, 1:18 pm 

Well double interesting. One reply says the double slit hasn't been performed with single photons. The next describes how single photons are emitted, presumably for experiments like the double-slit.

For the photons it seems as though they're being presumed to be waves with frequency and amplitude. Is that assuming what's supposed to be proven?
JustAsking
Forum Neophyte
 
Posts: 9
Joined: 08 Sep 2018


Re: Two-slit experiment details please

Postby davidm on September 12th, 2018, 1:29 pm 

JustAsking » September 12th, 2018, 11:18 am wrote:Well double interesting. One reply says the double slit hasn't been performed with single photons.


It has.

For the photons it seems as though they're being presumed to be waves with frequency and amplitude. Is that assuming what's supposed to be proven?


No.
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 546
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: Two-slit experiment details please

Postby JustAsking on September 21st, 2018, 4:16 pm 

davidm » September 12th, 2018, 12:29 pm wrote:
JustAsking » September 12th, 2018, 11:18 am wrote:Well double interesting. One reply says the double slit hasn't been performed with single photons.


It has.

For the photons it seems as though they're being presumed to be waves with frequency and amplitude. Is that assuming what's supposed to be proven?


No.
hysokos wrote this: Light has a frequency and an amplitude. A single frequency is used for these experiments, thus they are using a laser. "Amplitude" is how bright the light is.

Umm, that's wave talk. So how is that not presuming light is waves.
JustAsking
Forum Neophyte
 
Posts: 9
Joined: 08 Sep 2018


Re: Two-slit experiment details please

Postby Pivot on December 7th, 2018, 4:58 am 

A recently published paper 'EMR Wave-Particle Duality and Atomic Structure' (http://vixra.org/pdf/1811.0470v2.pdf) puts forward the argument that the 2-slit experiments demonstrate that photons to have a particle-wave duality, but not so for electrons, atoms and molecules. Rather than just taking a it-has-been proven stance, it examines detailed published reports of the 2-slit experiment for electrons, pointing out that the electron-by-electron cumulative plots are a continuum without any total destructive zones as claimed or insinuated. Although not being definitive about the cause of concentration zoning, it suggests surface drag and interference and the possible deflection of the electrons by surface plasmons. The article also does some interesting modeling for electrons and nucleons if you like a challenge.

Keep in mind that the maths of De Broglie and Dirac have wave-form characteristics, and to find experimental support for wave-particle duality in sub-atomic particles (such as electrons, atoms and molecules) would allow the maths to be extended. Herein lies a problem: your professor states that the experiments prove the duality, most of his/her peers do likewise, and QED is pursing the duality concept; so who are you to query it muggins?

It is indisputable that 2-slit experiments demonstrates the wave nature of light, and the photo-electric effect demonstrates the particle nature of photons. That said, take the time to check out the 2-slit experiments involving electrons, atoms and molecules; examine published results for the experiments objectively and critically before you make up your mind whether the banding represents destructive/constructive interference attributable to a wave-like nature for the particles involved. You owe it to yourself.
Pivot
Forum Neophyte
 
Posts: 48
Joined: 14 Apr 2016


Re: Two-slit experiment details please

Postby bangstrom on March 27th, 2019, 4:04 am 

Pivot » December 7th, 2018, 3:58 am wrote:

It is indisputable that 2-slit experiments demonstrates the wave nature of light, and the photo-electric effect demonstrates the particle nature of photons.


Electrons can only emit and absorb light energy in discrete quanta corresponding to the energy differences separating the many electron orbitals of an atom and these discrete emissions do not necessarily imply that light is a particle since waves emitted in discrete energies can also be responsible for the same effect. “Photon” detectors convert light energy into a flow of electrons which they count tick-tick-tick so they are counting electrons and not photons. This is another reason why the photo-electric effect does not demonstrate the particle nature of light.

Shahriar Afshar performed a test in 2004 based on a suggestion from John Wheeler about how to detect the presence of light as a particle. Afshar placed a wire screen in the null areas of an interference band to see if the screen would block any light particles- photons. The idea is that light waves can flow around a slender opaque object but light particles can not. His screen did not block any of the light so his experiment failed to detect the presence of light as a particle.

The Afshar experiment was thourghly damned by the critics for being error prone so a more elegant experiment was later performed by Eduardo Flores eliminating all the sources of error from Afshar’s original experiment. The Flores experiment also failed to detect the particle nature of light.

The particle nature of light is taken as a given in QED based on the photo-electric effect and it is used with Feynman’s “sum over histories” theory to correctly predict the nature of light but I see Feynman’s “sum over histories” as a bizarre fairy tale to explain light without abandoning the idea of light as a particle. I see nothing in either the photo-electric effect or QED to support the particle nature of light.
bangstrom
Member
 
Posts: 572
Joined: 18 Sep 2014
TheVat liked this post


Re: Two-slit experiment details please

Postby Graeme M on March 27th, 2019, 7:42 am 

bangstrom » September 8th, 2018, 9:00 pm wrote:...To add to the confusion, the interference pattern only forms when the slit is not observed. The interference pattern does not develop if the electron is observed to pass through one side of the slit or the other even if both slits remain open. An electron can either pass through one slit or the other but, if we know "which way" it went, the pattern does not form. Any knowledge of "which way" information destroys interference.


Is this really true? What does "observed" mean in this context?
Graeme M
Member
 
Posts: 158
Joined: 04 Nov 2015


Re: Two-slit experiment details please

Postby bangstrom on March 28th, 2019, 3:02 am 

Graeme M » March 27th, 2019, 6:42 am wrote:
Is this really true? What does "observed" mean in this context?


The results are true but I suspect the explanations are wrong.

In this case “observed” means being able to know, by any possible means, which slit a photon (or electron) has passed through in the double slit experiment. This is called “which-way” information. When we lack “which-way” information because the light was not observed, then light passing through the double slits produces an interference pattern typical of light passing through the slits as a wave. If the light is observed in such a way that we can obtain “which way” information at any time in the future, then light passes through the slits as a particle and no interference pattern is formed. So unobserved light acts as a wave and observed light acts as a particle.

The really bizarre part of this experiment is that we can predict the outcome of the experiment the moment we examine the data and determine if we either have, or do not have, which-way information so long as the outcome (interference or no interference) has not yet been observed. This is like being able to correctly predict the outcome of a horse race with certainty after the race has been run but before we know the result even if the race was centuries ago. It is as if recorded history is waiting for our prediction to name the winner.

Information about this easy to find if you look for tests of Wheeler’s delayed choice or the quantum eraser experiment.
https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/sear ... tion=click
bangstrom
Member
 
Posts: 572
Joined: 18 Sep 2014



Return to Physics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests