We present a first-principles, deterministic account of the quantum double-slit experiment with which-way detectors. Detectors are modeled as physical circuits possessing energetic barriers and therefore necessarily introduce localized interaction potentials. These interactions modify the action of electron paths and rotate the relative phase of each path. The continuous transition from interference to its suppression follows solely from unitary propagation. All probabilistic outcomes arise only from the quadratic mapping of the propagated state after propagation.
We present a first-principles, deterministic account of the quantum double-slit experiment with which-way detectors. Detectors are modeled as physical circuits possessing energetic barriers and therefore necessarily introduce localized interaction potentials. These interactions modify the action of electron paths and rotate the relative phase of each path. The continuous transition from interference to its suppression follows solely from unitary propagation. All probabilistic outcomes arise only from the quadratic mapping of the propagated state after propagation.
The double-slit experiment encompasses the deepest mysteries of Quantum Mechanics. Here, we offer a physically intuitive explanation of this experiment based on insight from a recently described statistical model for the CHSH-Bell and Franson experiments. Accordingly, while each particle follows a single path as it goes through the device and into a detector, it also modifies the physical properties of the vacuum around it by spontaneously breaking its group of symmetries. The well-known pattern of interference fringes that appears in statistical analysis of long sequences of repetitions is then understood as the result of the self-interaction of the propagating particles with the polarized vacuum they create around themselves. A novel experimental setup aimed to test the offered explanation is proposed.
A mathematical model for the slit experiments in the heart of quantum mechanics is developed to gain insight into quantum theory. The proposed system-theoretical model is entirely based on commutative mathematics, i.e. convolution, and integral transformations, and starts with spacetime functions with inherent energy-based cause and effect relations of the state-function Ѱ in the complex Hilbert space. The benefits of his approach are as 1-Invariance in time reversal. 2-Deterministic result functions in the model in line with the outcome of slit experiments. 3- Separation of causality and cross-correlations of attained states. 4- Disappearance of a posteriori probability of quantum states. 5- Quantum a priori fixed states after causality interactions have ended, (even) when quanta are (light-years) separated. The model predicts the patterns in the experiments with mathematical functions of the energy distributions. The quantum mechanical counterpart description of the physical reality of slit experiments thus may be considered complete in A. Einstein’s definition. The patterns in double slit experiments are found to be an effect of energy (amplitude-) modulation. An equivalent double-slit pattern can be retrieved from an input modulated 1-slit experiment excluding interference interpretations. The system-theoretical model uses generic properties of quanta and evolves into determinism in quantum mechanics slit experiments. The mathematics in the model handles beables by treatment of momentum p in system theoretical I/O relations of the transformed functions and allows the proposed description by the avoidance of a direct addressing of the individual quanta through variables. The following method yields exact, non-probabilistic results.
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 how the concept of undecidability 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 (following Einstein's conception of reality), while the detailed design of the set-up may render the question about the way they move through the set-up experimentally undecidable (which follows more Bohr's conception of reality). 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 = |ψ'_{1} + ψ'_{2}|^{2} = |ψ'_{1}|^{2} + |ψ'_{2}|^{2} = p_{1}+p_{2} $ such that the paradox that quantum mechanics (QM) would not follow the traditional rules of probability calculus disappears.
In which-way double-slit experiments with perfect detectors, it is assumed that having a second detector at the slits is redundant because it will not change the interference pattern. We, however, show that if higher-order or nonclassical paths are accounted for, the presence of the second detector will have an effect on the interference pattern. Accounting for these nonclassical paths also means that the Sorkin parameter in triple-slit experiments is only an approximate measure of Born-rule violation. Using the difference between single and double which-way detectors, we give an alternative parameter which is an exact measure of Born-rule violation.
Introduction In this chapter we show how the quantized detector network (QDN) formalism describes the double-slit (DS) experiment. This is arguably the simplest experiment that demonstrates quantum affects such as wave–particle duality and quantum interference. It continues to be the focus of much debate and experiment (Mardari, 2005), because theoretical modeling of what is going on reflects current understanding of quantum physics and hence physical reality.We will apply QDN to two variants: the original DS experiment and the monitored DS experiment, where an attempt is made to determine the imagined path of the particle. The DS experiment is widely acknowledged by physicists to be of importance to the understanding of quantum mechanics (QM). So much so that in 2002, the single electron version, first performed by Merli, Missiroli, and Pozzi (Merli et al., 1976), was voted by readers of Physics World to be “the most beautiful experiment in physics” (Rosa, 2012). The DS experiment can be discussed in terms of three stages, shown in Figure 10.1. By the end of the preparation stage, Σ 0 , a monochromatic beam of light or particles has been prepared by a source P , such as a laser. The beam emerges from point O and then passes through an information void V 1 to the first stage, Σ 1 , which consists of a wall or barrier W . This wall has two openings denoted A and B that allow parts of the beam to pass through into another information void V 2 and onto the second and final stage Σ 2 , which consists of a detecting screen S . The screen S is in general some material that can absorb and record particle impacts. In reality, any screen will consist of a finite number of signal detectors, such as photosensitive molecules, but the typical QM modeling is done as if there were a continuum of sites on the screen, such as C , that could register particles.
## AbstractA deterministic interpretation of the double-slit experiment is proposed, in which the electron is treated as a localized particle at all times. The observed interference pattern is attributed to a real physical energy wave in the electromagnetic field, generated by the electron's accelerated motion through the field. This energy wave reaches the slit barrier, where the slit geometry creates coherent waves that merge to form a constructive interference wave. This wave redistributes energy in the field, creating an Electron-EMF coupled pathway that guides the particle to the detector. The apparent randomness of individual impacts arises from incomplete knowledge of the initial conditions, not from intrinsic indeterminism. The measurement effect is modelled as a disturbance of the coherent energy waves, either preventing the formation of the coupled pathway or destroying it after formation. The model is extended to the quantum eraser experiment, where the restoration of coherence via a polarizer naturally explains the reappearance of interference. A further extension to the delayed-choice quantum eraser is proposed, introducing the Entangled Constructive Interference Wave (ECIW) as a physical mechanism for entanglement within the model. The mechanism is shown to apply across geometries beyond the double slit. Predictions include a correlation between landing position and flight time, offering a testable distinction from standard quantum mechanical interpretations. A preliminary, illustrative mathematical framework is provided, situating the model within the pilot-wave tradition. **Keywords: ** Double-slit experiment, pilot wave, electromagnetic field, quantum interpretation, determinism, hidden variables, measurement problem, energy wave, coupled pathway, quantum eraser, delayed-choice quantum eraser, entanglement.