On Tuesday, October 29, 2019 at 5:53:10 PM UTC-6, Alan Grayson wrote: > > > On Tuesday, October 29, 2019 at 5:18:45 PM UTC-6, Brent wrote: >> >> >> On 10/29/2019 3:48 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: >> >> >> On Tuesday, October 29, 2019 at 1:55:17 PM UTC-6, Brent wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 10/29/2019 12:46 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, October 29, 2019 at 1:25:43 PM UTC-6, Brent wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 10/29/2019 11:43 AM, Alan Grayson wrote: >>>> >>>> What does that mean? No one even detects them. They need not even be >>>>> absorbed, but could simply fly off to infinity. >>>>> >>>>> Brent >>>>> >>>> >>>> What exactly is the situation? Interference is destroyed, more and >>>> more, as they get hotter, but without any observations? AG >>>> >>>> >>>> Right. >>>> >>>> Brent >>>> >>> >>> It sounds like some sort of hidden variable (don't take this too >>> literally), where the particles send out information of whether >>> interference will occur or not, and it doesn't matter if it's observed. >>> This could fit into my model of superposition with some modification; >>> namely, it you do a which-way experiment, OR if information about which-way >>> is available, interference is destroyed. And what goes through the slits in >>> the absence of these conditions is a wave going through both slits. AG >>> >>> >>> OK. Except "send out" doesn't make sense. It implies signaling, which >>> would be at less than light speed (c.f. delay choice quantum eraser >>> experiment). >>> >>> Brent >>> >> >> What descriptive term do you prefer? Those IR photons travel at the SoL. >> The point is that if there's information available for which-way, even if >> not observed, the interference is destroyed. AG >> >> >> What does "available" mean? The information that left at the speed of >> light is not "available" in any conventional sense at the screen or >> detector in the experiment. >> >> Brent >> > > That's the mystery we have to figure out. What we know, is that the > particles release IR photons which could be observed, and when that > emission occurs, interference disappears. It doesn't even depend on any > observations being made. AG >
I would revise my interpretation this way; the electron, or whatever, behaves as a wave when no information exists to distinguish which-way, and that wave goes through both slits producing interference. When such information exists, even if it isn't used or measured, the interference ceases to exist. Obviously, there's a huge mystery how the existence of such information is sufficient to destroy interference, but that's what the experimental results demonstrate. AG -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/9d13eee6-5f1c-4a0d-a51a-4a8a6474ff0e%40googlegroups.com.
