• Björn Tantau@swg-empire.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      That’s not really it. You need something that measures the state of the electron. Merely looking in the direction is not enough. It has to be something that interacts with the electron.

      A camera alone isn’t enough. But light (eg photons) with enough energy should be enough. But then that energy will manipulate the electron. If you had a completely dark room and pointed a camera at the experiment it wouldn’t change anything.

      It’s kind of like having your cake and eating it too.

      • OpenStars@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Yeah, it turns out that slapping the electron around like with a big stick or whatever causes it to change its behavior, go figure! :-P

      • acetanilide@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        So if we didn’t need light to see it then it would continue doing whatever it does?

        I wonder how the universe would look if we didn’t need light to see 🤔

  • sj_zero@lotide.fbxl.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    It’s really frustrating that people who don’t understand this experiment have insanely taken into assume that a magic particle spell understands if a human being is watching or not.

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Perhaps it would be better to explain why instead of attempting a mic drop based on your superior knowledge?

      It’s called the observer effect, and it happens because:

      This is often the result of utilizing instruments that, by necessity, alter the state of what they measure in some manner.

      And particularly in the double-slit experiment:

      Physicists have found that observation of quantum phenomena by a detector or an instrument can change the measured results of this experiment.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_(physics)

      So for anyone who wants to have a surface understanding of the observer effect, the wiki does a fair job of the basic explanation.

      • oce 🐆@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I think the issue is that quantum mechanics is hard to popularize without leading people into wrong conclusions, pop science clickbaits make this worse.
        I find it easier to understand if you say that observing necessarily means there’s an interaction energy (for example a photon), otherwise no information can be retrieved, and however small that information retrieval energy is, quantum systems are so sensitive, that it is enough to modify their behavior.

    • DefinitelyNotAPhone [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Consciousness is not part of the observer effect (which is itself named in the most infuriating way possible, specifically because it makes people think that the universe is somehow aware of when something sentient is looking at it). “Observing” a particle requires interacting with it in such a way that you meaningfully affect its current state of being, whether that be deflecting it in a different direction than it was going or changing its velocity, and therefore it is impossible at a quantum level to be a passive observer that does not influence the outcome.

      In the case of the double slit experiment, if unobserved light will act as a wave with interference and if observed then it acts like a particle. The reason for this is both complicated and simple: light behaves as a wave due to probability. There’s no way of observing a photon without influencing it, so therefore the best we can do is say it has a certain probability of being in this collection of spaces, which in the case of photons is a wave (because it can travel in any of a number of directions outwards from the photon emitter in the experiment, but all going away from the emitter and towards the wall the slits are cut into). For the purposes of this probability wave, the start position is the emitter and the end position is the wall behind the slits, so averaging out a large number of photons will recreate the interference pattern on the wall.

      However, if you observe the photons at the slits to try and figure out which slits they’re going through you have influenced the photons and thus collapsed that probability wave into a particle, and in the process created a new probability wave from that moment onwards which has the same end position as the original wave, but now starts at the individual slit. From its perspective, there is no second slit, so now the wave acts as if it is in the single slit setup because from its perspective it is, hence the loss of interference.

      Nothing here has anything to do with consciousness. You can recreate this experiment with no one in the room and it will behave exactly the same, and has a sound (if very confusing conventionally) mathematical cause.

      On a side note, string theory is effectively unfalsifiable and therefore completely useless as a scientific theory.