On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 9:41:28 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: > > > On 11/5/2019 8:10 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: > > On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 5:24:35 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: >> >> >> >> On 11/5/2019 2:49 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: >> > >> > That's what I don't understand. If there's no detector focused on, or >> > watching the slits, >> > how can which-way information exist? All we observe is loss of >> > interference without >> > which-way information. What can we conclude from this? AG >> >> That we don't have to possess the which-way information. It's enough >> that it exists. >> >> Brent >> > > Yes, that's how I revised my understanding of the double slit experiment. > BUT Bruce says we DO get which-way information. How is that possible just > based on temperature? AG > > > He didn't say we got it. He said it was possible to get it. Just as > watching a glowing body allows you to know its trajectory. > > Brent >
I see. Then we don't need Buckyballs or heated particles, just a cloud chamber enclosing a double slit experiment with electrons being fired, and no need to look at the paths, and the interference pattern would disappear. If so, what about the deBroglie wave length for the electron and its wave like property? Does it become irrelevant to the result of the experiment? 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/ac4a972c-a2e2-489e-a00c-946525a2631a%40googlegroups.com.
