Abstract We construct proper microscopic propositions to consistently explain the interference patterns obtained for electrons and photons in well-defined one- and two-slit experiments. Our propositions are also made explicit on the basis of quantum mechanics with proper quantitative analysis to support the correctness of the physical mechanisms proposed herein, which obey the wave-particle duality. Apart from that, the microscopic propositions constructed herein can be treated as guidelines in setting up the future experiments such that one can unambiguously support or oppose this strange notion—a quantum particle behaves differently depending upon the number of slit, and where we place the detector such that the particle can sense the detector and the number of slit, before physically interacting with them.
Abstract We construct proper microscopic propositions to consistently explain the interference patterns obtained for electrons and photons in well-defined one- and two-slit experiments. Our propositions are also made explicit on the basis of quantum mechanics with proper quantitative analysis to support the correctness of the physical mechanisms proposed herein, which obey the wave-particle duality. Apart from that, the microscopic propositions constructed herein can be treated as guidelines in setting up the future experiments such that one can unambiguously support or oppose this strange notion—a quantum particle behaves differently depending upon the number of slit, and where we place the detector such that the particle can sense the detector and the number of slit, before physically interacting with them.
We construct proper microscopic propositions to consistently explain the interference patterns obtained for electrons and photons in well-defined one- and two-slit experiments. Our propositions are also made explicit on the basis of quantum mechanics with proper quantitative analysis to support the correctness of the physical mechanisms proposed herein, which obey the wave-particle duality. In particular, our propositions and theoretical analysis demonstrate that for single-photon detection (after time integration), we cannot produce interference pattern if the usual diffraction slits are replaced with slit holes such that the non-transparent slit material does not permit photons to transmit, reflect internally or refract. However, the said non-transparent slit material with slit holes can produce the usual interference pattern with electromagnetic waves.
We construct proper microscopic propositions to consistently capture and explain the interference patterns obtained for electrons and photons, detected individually or otherwise, in one- and two-slit experiments. We propose that for single-photon detections (after time integration), no interference pattern is obtained if one uses non-transparent slit material with slit holes (not diffraction slits). The non-transparent slit material does not permit photons to transmit, reflect internally nor refract. However, the same slit holes can produce the usual interference pattern with electromagnetic waves due to interfering in-phase and out-of-phase light waves. As for the electrons, detected individually or not, partial interference patterns can always be obtained from the two-slit experiment when one of the slits is closed (one at a time), which then can be manually overlapped to produce the complete interference pattern of a double-slit experiment. These new theoretically constructed experimental results for photons and electrons can be readily verified with our current technology using suitable optically non-transparent (for photons) and highly insulating (for electrons) slit materials.
Abstract The double-slit experiment is a classic experiment that presents the clearest manifestation of wave-particle duality, one of the fundamental principles of quantum mechanics. The double-slit experiment still remains the phenomenon that demonstrates wave-particle duality at the most fundamental level. This phenomenon quantitatively and conceptually demonstrates that microscopic objects can behave like both waves and particles at the same time. This article provides an in-depth analysis of the physical nature of dualism, the mechanism of formation of the interference pattern, and the impact of the act of observation on the dynamics of quantum systems. The need for a new perspective on this topic is due to the fact that the current uncertainty in the interpretation of quantum reality has not yet been completely eliminated, and the boundaries between classical and quantum behavior in microscopic objects are still being explored. The results presented here restructure the deep mechanisms of the interference picture, more clearly frame the relationship between observation and wavefunction collapse, and provide a quantum. Since the article attempts to provide a complete answer to the mechanism of the formation of wave-particle duality, extensive space is given to sections such as historical development, theoretical models, modern research, etc. New approaches to this phenomenon have been developed using modern research and string theory. As a result, a new mathematical expression has been proposed that explains the reasons for the initial emergence of wave-particle duality, and is also important for string theory. The article explains the measurement problem with a more effective physical structure and ontological model.
We report observations of Cross-Double-Slit Experiment and Which-Path-Cross-Double-Slit experiment. Cross-Double-Slit apparatus contains two double-slit, where first double-slit is perpendicular to second double-slit. The first double-slit and the second double-slit generate not only their own interference pattern perpendicular to each other, but also generate “Cross-interference-patterns”. When we do which-way experiment with one of two double-slit, say first double-slit, then its interference pattern disappeared, i.e., photons behave as particles; but the second double-slit’s interference pattern and the cross-interference-pattern still exist; which implies an significant phenomenon that in the same experiment, photons behave as both wave and particle, which is first time caught on film. Thus we suggest to re-study wave-particle duality, which is the basic mystery of quantum mechanics. We postulate that the particle nature of photons is intrinsic; while the wave-like of photons is manifest-behavior.
We argue that the double-slit experiment can be understood much better by considering it as an experiment whereby
one uses electrons to study the set-up rather than an experiment whereby we use a set-up to study the behaviour of electrons.
We also show that the concept of undecidability (like e.g. occurs in G\odel's theorem) can be used in an intuitive way to make sense of the double-slit experiment
and the quantum rules for calculating coherent and incoherent probabilities. We meet here a situation where the electrons always behave in a fully
deterministic way, while the detailed design of the set-up may render the question about the way they move through the set-up experimentally undecidable.
It is very important to make a distinction in quantum mechanics
between the determinism of nature (Einstein)
and the decidability of a question within an experimental set-up (Bohr).
The former is about the absolute truth of an answer to a yes or no question, and follows binary logic
(true or false),
the latter about what an experimental set-up
can decide and tell about the truth of that answer, and follows ternary logic (true, false or undecidable).
Binary and ternary logic are incompatible.
The viewpoints of Bohr and Einstein are thus operating on different levels and it is only by confusing these two levels
that these two viewpoints seem to be irreconcilable.
We show that the expression ψ1+ψ2 for the wave function of the double-slit experiment is numerically correct, but logically flawed. It has to be replaced in the interference region
by the logically correct expression ψ1′+ψ2′, which has the same numerical value as
ψ1+ψ2, such that ψ1′+ψ2′=ψ1+ψ2,
but with ψ1′=2ψ1+ψ2e4π=ψ1 and
ψ2′=2ψ1+ψ2e−4π=ψ2.
Here ψ1′ and ψ2′ are the correct
contributions from the slits to the total wave function ψ1′+ψ2′.
We have then $p = |\psi'_{1} + \psi'_{2}|^{2} = |\psi'_{1}|^{2} + |\psi'_{2}|^{2} = p_{1}+p_{2} $ such that the paradox
that quantum mechanics (QM) would not follow the traditional rules of probability calculus disappears.
The paradox is rooted in the wrong intuition that ψ1 and ψ2 would be the true physical contributions to
ψ1′+ψ2′=ψ1+ψ2 like in the case of waves in a water tank.
The solution proposed here is not {\em ad hoc} but based on an extensive analysis of the geometrical meaning of spinors within group representation theory
and its application to QM. Working further on the argument one can even show that an interference pattern is the only way to satisfy simultaneously
two conditions: The condition obeying binary logic (in the spirit of Einstein) that the electron has only two mutually exclusive options to get to the detector (viz. going through slit S1 or going through slit S2) and the condition obeying ternary logic (in the spirit of Bohr)
that the question which one of these two options the electron has taken is experimentally undecidable.
A very important element in the analysis is the problem of the non-existence of {\em common} probability distributions for different experimental set-ups.
And this is a recurrent theme in other situations that are felt as paradoxical.
The CHSH inequality used in the experiments of Aspect {\em et al.}
clashes with quantum mechanics because it
is based on the assumption that there would exist a {\em common} probability distribution for the
hidden variables in the different experiments that have to be made to determine the various quantities that intervene in the inequality.
That common probability distribution for measured quantities does not exist is well known from quantum mechanics itself (because the operators that come into play do not commute and therefore do not have common eigenstates, i.e.
common probability amplitudes). But this non-existence of common probability distributions applies also to certain variables in the set-ups of the different experiments and the latter fact
can also be explained by purely classical reasoning.
Abstract: Many problems exist in the Double Slit Experiment when you consider that the elements in the test are moving as waves. Outside of the pattern resembling peeks and troughs that overlap each other; there is no real scientific explanation on how this is taking place. In a more accurate and classical way, can we explain how the dark and light areas of the interference pattern are being made? Why is an Interference pattern being made when particles are being sent through the exercise one at a time? And how is it that through observation the Interference pattern collapses in on itself. Waves add more questions than they do answers, a very typical outcome of an incorrect solution. Maybe the unanswered questions left behind by the wave theory is a confirmation of its inaccuracy and not the mystique of its results. Rather than double down on the wave theory with time traveling particles, elements of duality, and the Copenhagen Interpretation; l reconsidered that elements tested in the double slit experiment behave as particles. But this time, I weighed the thought that these bits of matter are much smaller than previously thought. This new logic allowed particles with straight trajectories to interact with the edge of materials used in the double slit wall in a very detailed way. This created a storm of new ways to look at what is really taking place in the test; revealing the competence of the detectors utilized and the capacity of the Nonlinear Optical Crystal. Everything solved from just one idea, that quantum move as particles but on a much smaller scale. This is the enigma of the Double Slit Experiment.