Is the double slit experiment wrong?

[nicklambo]

I have always loved this experiment but have a different solution to what is actually happening ( particle splits into two places at the same time). My thought is that the particle does not split but is actually interacting with the wave field that will exist in the future (interacting with the photons that have not yet but will be fired)...I know this seems far fetched but no more so than the current theory)...I think that it would be possible to test this theory out and if correct may show that the future is already set and not being created as we move along it....

[Einion Yrth]

Start here, then consider going here. Then just poke around on the internet. Your thought is not new, but it's not necessarily wrong, either. Oh, and general relativity tells us that other inertial frames can observe as "the present" that which is to you "the future", so...

[V8LM]

If an observable, the fringes, were dependent on future events then we would have a way of communicating in time.

Edited by V8LM on Sunday 21st February 21:27

[Some Gump]

Jim not a particle physicist, but would be more than happy to contribute to future "double slit" experiments..

http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/meet...

[Derek Smith]

nicklambo said:

I have always loved this experiment but have a different solution to what is actually happening ( particle splits into two places at the same time). My thought is that the particle does not split but is actually interacting with the wave field that will exist in the future (interacting with the photons that have not yet but will be fired)...I know this seems far fetched but no more so than the current theory)...I think that it would be possible to test this theory out and if correct may show that the future is already set and not being created as we move along it....

In that case, the experiment has already been done and has proved what you say.

I take your point though. The current theory is quite far fetched and might well be wrong but at the moment a lot of people seem to think it the best option. It is in danger of becoming a sacred cow as its implications give rise to what is regarded as fun by physicists.

[maffski]

Derek Smith said:

In that case, the experiment has already been done and has proved what you say.

I take your point though. The current theory is quite far fetched and might well be wrong but at the moment a lot of people seem to think it the best option. It is in danger of becoming a sacred cow as its implications give rise to what is regarded as fun by physicists.

I've always liked the multiverse explanation. Although overall I'm probably 50/50.

[annodomini2]

There was listing for an experiment recently where they have managed to reproduce the effect on a macro scale, which supposedly relates to an earlier interpretation of the experiment, where the particle-wave interaction of the preceding particle interacts with the particle-wave interaction of the succeeding particle.

I'm not saying either is correct.

Can't seem to track it down though.

[ALT F4]

My personal theory - without any mathematical basis (and probably without any wider scientific following) - is that the existence of one single particle seemingly in two different places is the consequence of a higher dimension being 'viewed' in only 3D+time dimensions that we are used to.

In that all EM waves, particles/matter, everything - interacts in all dimensions, and that certain 3D+time experiments that we create can demonstrate the 'non-viewable 5th dimension'.



Hopefully CERN can produce evidence of more dimensions in the near future - hopefully within my lifetime whereby science can take some big leaps forward.

[Plasticspoon]

This maybe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmC0ygr08tE

[Monty Python]

The question you should be asking is "Is the explanation for the double-slit experiment wrong?" (unless you're suggesting someone cocked it up).

[nicklambo]

Thank you Monty Python...You are of course correct...

Fascinating information and thanks for all the replies.....Plenty to keep the old grey cells working!

[nicklambo]

ALT F4 said:

My personal theory - without any mathematical basis (and probably without any wider scientific following) - is that the existence of one single particle seemingly in two different places is the consequence of a higher dimension being 'viewed' in only 3D+time dimensions that we are used to.

In that all EM waves, particles/matter, everything - interacts in all dimensions, and that certain 3D+time experiments that we create can demonstrate the 'non-viewable 5th dimension'.



Hopefully CERN can produce evidence of more dimensions in the near future - hopefully within my lifetime whereby science can take some big leaps forward.

Thought something similar.....that all forces are equal but their effects are felt differenty across different dimensions..

[Atomic12C]

Digging this thread up again....was watching youtube vids recently on the origins of quantum mechanics etc.

Relating back to the OP's question;

Consider a photon as a wave, its a wave that propagates within the electromagnetic field that fills the universe.
As it is a wave it has a wave-like features that interact as the wave propagates from one place to another, and also as the wave interacts with other matter.

Its only when a measurement is taken that the wave 'becomes' a particle.
So as the wave falls on the rear screen and is measured, the wave then 'collapses' down to its most strongest point. (ie. if you were to consider all the intensities or individual amplitudes of the wave as it falls on the screen, the strongest location would be the point where the particle is formed - simplistic form of the maths, but there is also probability to take in to account).

And I think it is this 'order' of events that should be followed.
(ie. don't think of a photon as a particle to start with)


There is a theory that is currently being developed all the time called "pilot-wave theory".
This involves considering a photon as a particle being guided/pushed by a wave function.

Both traditional quantum mechanics and pilot-wave theory explain the double-slit experiment very well.