Quantum Soccer: The Double-Slit Experiment
Based on the description in Sect. 2.3 , a perceptive reader might well question the reality of quantum probability waves by posing something like the following scenario. Suppose one observes a classical object, such as a bowling ball flying down a lane.
- PDF / 223,075 Bytes
- 9 Pages / 595.516 x 790.987 pts Page_size
- 80 Downloads / 153 Views
Quantum Soccer: The Double-Slit Experiment 3.1
A Reasonable Doubt Based on the description in Sect. 2.3, a perceptive reader might well question the reality of quantum probability waves by posing something like the following scenario. Suppose one observes a classical object, such as a bowling ball flying down a lane. Halfway to the pins, the observer shuts his or In Sects. 1.2 and 2.3, it was a her eyes and keeps them shut until the ball reaches the end baseball, and it will soon beof the lane. Can the observer predict with certainty which come a soccer ball. path will be taken and which pins will be knocked over? Certainly not. Due to his or her imperfect knowledge, it is as if the bowling ball has become a “wave of probability” across a superposition of possible outcomes, only one of which will eventually be realized. Of course, there is nothing at all mysterious going on here. In reality, the ball follows a single path only; the “wave” simply reflects the observer’s ignorance about which path that is and does not influence the actual state of the ball itself. We call this kind of wave a wave of “classical statistical probability.” Might something similar be going on in quantum physics? There are at least two reasons why the answer is a People like A. Einstein cerresounding “no.” The first we have already addressed: the tainly hoped so. © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2018 Y. Nomura et al., Quantum Physics, Mini Black Holes, and the Multiverse, Multiversal Journeys, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-41709-7 3
25
26
CHAPTER 3. QUANTUM SOCCER: THE DOUBLE-SLIT EXPERIMENT
HUP is a fundamental limitation that cannot be ameliorated through improved observation. Classical probability waves, on the other hand, allow for any degree of observer certainty, at least in principle. Indeed, for the above bowling ball example, all the observer needs to do to remove all an act which still has no effect uncertainty is to keep his or her eyes open the whole time. on the ball. . .
The second reason is a bit more subtle but also much more weird. In classical statistical theory, the different parts of the probability wave behave independently. After all, only one path is the “real” path actually followed by the classical object, which cannot be influenced by the “paths not taken.” A quantum probability wave, on the other hand, behaves much more like a tangible wave, in the sense that different parts of the wave do interact with each other.
For instance, when two parts of a tangible wave collide, the result is often wave interference—a pattern of alternator “bright” and “dark,” in the ing “high” and “low” fringes, with a spacing that relates dicase of light waves. . . rectly to the wavelength. Classical probability waves never manifest interference—behaving instead more like stereothough “never” is a slightly typical “bell curves.” dangerous word. . . Guess what quantum probability waves do? The double-slit experiment is extremely important, because it provides a direct and dramatic example of quantum wave interference, in the labo
Data Loading...
