Young's double-slit experiment

[k24anson]

I am not a physics major though I like to keep abreast of the latest news. I have wondered if after almost two hundred years of performing earth bound double-slit experiments, if a similar experiment were performed in space, outside of major gravitational or planetary magnetic fields, if the wave/partical interference would be observed? I can only imagine that in space the observations are somehow different when Young's experiment is performed, and the flurry of media attention and discussion that will follow.<br /><br />I wrote a number of emails to different NASA people on this subject, to no avail. Would anyone at Space.com Discussion Board have any thoughts on this idea. Perhaps I don't have enough of an understanding of physics, and my idea is irrelevant because. I like to think though how cool it would be if this experiment were conducted properly in space, and the results are different than two hundered years of earth bound experiments. Supposing this is so, how cool it would be ...! Anyone have any thoughts in this regard. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <span style="color:#000080" class="Apple-style-span">Stay focused. Go slow. Keep it simple.</span> </div>

 

[Saiph]

Wheeler (the famous physicist) proposed a possible experiment IIRC...at least I don't <i>think</i> it was based on actual data, that used gravitational lensing of a large galaxy or cluster to provide the "double slit" through which the light of a more distant galaxy passed.<br /><br />This would provide a setup for the double slit experiment that was billions of light years long. If we still get the same result...it really messes with the mind. For instance if light travels as either photons or a wave, then our experiment now, and here, determined how the light was radiated at its source, billions of years ago. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#c0c0c0"><br /></font></p><p align="center"><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">----</font></em></font><font color="#666699">SaiphMOD@gmail.com </font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">-------------------</font></em></font></p><p><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">"This is my Timey Wimey Detector.  Goes "bing" when there's stuff.  It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually.  I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- </font></em></font><font size="1" color="#999999">The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[yevaud]

He called it "Law without Law." Something to do with that if the observer determines which slit the photon will enter, and the light was emitted on a certain path billions of years ago in a distant galaxy, then we had just committed time travel: we determined the path of the photon emmitted billions of years ago by our observation today.<br /><br />Something like that. Long time since I read of it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[Saiph]

exactly...that if light travels in one state only (wave or photon) we can effect an event (radiation of light) billions of years in the past by doing an observation today.<br /><br />My thoughts on the matter is: It's far simpler to think of light as being both at the same time, and you see which ever behavior you look for. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#c0c0c0"><br /></font></p><p align="center"><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">----</font></em></font><font color="#666699">SaiphMOD@gmail.com </font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">-------------------</font></em></font></p><p><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">"This is my Timey Wimey Detector.  Goes "bing" when there's stuff.  It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually.  I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- </font></em></font><font size="1" color="#999999">The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[yevaud]

A "Wavicle." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[Saiph]

or a particave <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#c0c0c0"><br /></font></p><p align="center"><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">----</font></em></font><font color="#666699">SaiphMOD@gmail.com </font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">-------------------</font></em></font></p><p><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">"This is my Timey Wimey Detector.  Goes "bing" when there's stuff.  It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually.  I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- </font></em></font><font size="1" color="#999999">The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[k24anson]

With modern apparatus, just a simple double-slit experiment performed inside the space station (though I would tend to think the distance of the space station is still too close to the magnetic and gravitational influences of earth and moon to create different conditions than those found on terrestrial earth.) Though supposing if from only two hundred miles above earth the results are different than earth bound observations, ...? All I can say is <b>Wow!</b> if the results are in any way different. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <span style="color:#000080" class="Apple-style-span">Stay focused. Go slow. Keep it simple.</span> </div>

 

[yevaud]

The results would be slightly different than on the ground, as it would be in a microgravity environment. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[Saiph]

how's the microgravity environment going to alter a traditional double slit experiment? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#c0c0c0"><br /></font></p><p align="center"><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">----</font></em></font><font color="#666699">SaiphMOD@gmail.com </font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">-------------------</font></em></font></p><p><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">"This is my Timey Wimey Detector.  Goes "bing" when there's stuff.  It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually.  I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- </font></em></font><font size="1" color="#999999">The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[billslugg]

As I understand it, photons have mass when they are going at light speed, therefore the lesser gravity in orbit might have some influence. A photon's rest mass is zero. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[Saiph]

but gravity doesn't really factor into the double slit experiment in the first place. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#c0c0c0"><br /></font></p><p align="center"><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">----</font></em></font><font color="#666699">SaiphMOD@gmail.com </font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">-------------------</font></em></font></p><p><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">"This is my Timey Wimey Detector.  Goes "bing" when there's stuff.  It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually.  I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- </font></em></font><font size="1" color="#999999">The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[Mee_n_Mac]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p><font color="yellow">but gravity doesn't really factor into the double slit experiment in the first place.</font><p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />I wouldn't have thought so either but let me speculate off the top of my head for a second. Imagine the experiment performed in microgravity and then again near a black hole's event horizon. Would the gravitational gradient cause a different "focussing" of the interference pattern ? Said another way, if I measured the distance btw crests in said pattern, would that measurement be the same in both cases ?<br /><br />And then again since the "ruler" I'd be using would be distorted as well, would I be able to measure any difference ? I think I need some more coffee before I think about this ....<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>

 

[yevaud]

Gravity would have a minor effect in determining the path oth the photon. Under most circumstances, there would be little noticeable effect. There, but too tiny to note.<br /><br />In close orbit around a singularity, more noticeable I'd think. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[Saiph]

as yevaud says, you may notice a difference in the specific interference pattern observed. However, the pattern itself isn't the point of the double slit experiment. The existence of the wave interference pattern, or of the "shotgun" particle diffusion pattern is what we care about, not the specific pattern themselves.<br /><br /><br /><br />Now, the case for the "wavicle" using the young double slit experiment is made thus:<br /><br />Use a very low intensity monochromatic light source, where the energy emitted per second or minute is on the order of only a few quanta of energy. I.e. a light that emits only one type of photon (say red), and slowly enought that it is emitted as a single photon once every second or so.<br /><br />Now, send this light through two slits, "unobserved". With a normal light, you'd get an interference pattern out the other end.<br /><br />In this case we se single photon hits upon the detector/film. However, over time the hits aren't clustered around one single point (standard particle diffusion pattern)...they form the striped interference pattern of a wave. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#c0c0c0"><br /></font></p><p align="center"><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">----</font></em></font><font color="#666699">SaiphMOD@gmail.com </font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">-------------------</font></em></font></p><p><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">"This is my Timey Wimey Detector.  Goes "bing" when there's stuff.  It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually.  I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- </font></em></font><font size="1" color="#999999">The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[yevaud]

Leading one to the curious but true effect that one Photon has apparently gone through both slits. And then interfered with itself. (thus demonstrating wavelike qualities)<br /><br />QM is nuts. I love it. <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

"How can you be in two places at once, when you're not anywhere at allllll...."<br />(70's Flashback) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[Saiph]

I wouldn't call it basic...more like intermediate, or advanced armchair physics <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#c0c0c0"><br /></font></p><p align="center"><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">----</font></em></font><font color="#666699">SaiphMOD@gmail.com </font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">-------------------</font></em></font></p><p><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">"This is my Timey Wimey Detector.  Goes "bing" when there's stuff.  It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually.  I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- </font></em></font><font size="1" color="#999999">The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>