Exploring Double Slit Experiment in Space

In summary: Earth. Solar winds are also negligible in comparison to Earth's atmosphere.In summary, the double slit experiment has been conducted in space and has not been affected by Earth's magnetic field.
  • #36
In fact the effect of magnetic & electric fields, radiation, gravity...etc on the two slit experiment for photons would be very easy to do.

Electrons however do couple to gravitational, electric & magnetic fields so those variables will impact on the interference pattern.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
There are a lot of contradictions and the interpretations of the experiments are not clear. All experiments done are black box like for the people which are not involved directly.

[Mentor's note: Link to unsatisfactory video reference removed]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #38
lkrustev said:
There are a lot of contradictions and the interpretations of the experiments are not clear. All experiments done are black box like for the people which are not involved directly. So we have to accept that the reality is not objective. And as example the "put detectors in the system and record data=NO interference, then leave the detectors working but not record=interference" interpretation is from Jim Al-Khalili which is currently Professor of Theoretical Physics and Chair in the Public Engagement in Science at the University of Surrey
.

Sorry, that statement is simply wrong. As mentioned previously, the recorder makes no difference. Consciousness makes no difference. You only need to turn on or off the recorder to see that it does nothing to the resulting pattern.

And your video reference falls far short of a suitable reference. You will need to post more substantive than that - a peer-reviewed paper would be appropriate to support assertions of non-standard science.
 
  • Like
Likes Orodruin
  • #39
I do not make statements. I am just trying to filter the junk information with your help. So, I thank you! In fact your statement makes more sense to me. For me it means that there is a chance even a slight one, that the detection system is destroying the interference, which supports the objective reality instead the crazy consciousness-observer related paradoxes. Thank you one more time!
 
  • #40
lkrustev said:
For me it means that there is a chance even a slight one, that the detection system is destroying the interference, which supports the objective reality instead the crazy consciousness-observer related paradoxes.

Whether there is objective reality or subjective reality is an open question in quantum physics. It is answered differently by each "interpretation" of QM.

Subjective reality - in contradiction to pop explanations - does not require a conscious observer. The "observer" is the context of the experimental setup itself, not a person (or recorder). To be specific: The EPR Paradox essentially points out that the reality of an object "here" is dependent on the nature of a measurement (observation) "there" (if you assume no action at a distance). This is a definition of subjective reality. With objective reality, each element of reality exists independently of the act of observation.

So removing consciousness from the equation does not change the debate between subjective vs objective realism in physics. There is no evidence at this time to distinguish these views as your interpretation guides your viewpoint. In Bohmian Mechanics, for example, there is objective realism.
 
  • #41
Further discussion should go into a new thread - this one has reached a natural stopping point.
It is now closed.
 
Back
Top