Wave Particle Duality

-This is long. I will need to edit it, I bet. There might be typo's poor grammar and mistakes. I am tired and will edit later. - Kiefer presented me with a link on physics in the evolution form Subject: Intelligent design. Based on my research I disagree with his conclusion below:

The double slit experiment worked the way it did because when not being observed, the electron goes through both, neither, and each single one of the slits at the same time and interferes with itself to create the wave like interference pattern. When observed it does not, because any act of measurement disturbs the electrons and thus destroys the interference pattern. This is possible because electrons move so quickly that they can, for a brief amount of time, exist in multiple places at once.

I highly suggest this websites videos on Physics, Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, and Standard Model for further information. It can get a little annoying at times, but the information is very interesting.

This video would be an outstanding resource for 9th - 12th grade students with an interest in Quantum Mechanics. As you know analogies are not intended to substitute for real world; the same goes for cartoons - Roadrunner comes to mind . I recently made this mistake with "Dr.Quantum".

The word observed only seems used in "popular" text or when speaking to an audience which lacks an 8 year degree like myself. More frequently I have found a word similar to '
interaction' (interaction with the object or 'interference' from the interaction of the object measuring it.) This is what causes the change in this experiment NOT 'observation.

• http://web.phys.ksu.edu/vqmorig/tutorials/online/prep/ - double slit at home The form of the wave-function in the double slit experiment will be radically different if only one slit is open compared to both slits being open. So even for a single interaction the likely position of an interaction on the screen depends on whether both slits are open or not.

I would like to stop for a second?

This is possible because electrons move so quickly that they can, for a brief amount of time, exist in multiple places at once.

It is interesting you bring this up. I am not sure what you are referring to here. I have read no scientific study which has arrived at this conclusion. Possibly I need to read much more. But this speed or 'ability' to be in many places at once suggests omnipresence. Quantum Entanglement is the ability for the most basic building blocks of everything to interact over any distance instantly as if space-time did not exist. This is something I know less about. However, it interests the heck out of me.
*I realize there is most likely a physical explanation for this. I playfully said possibly it demonstrates some form of intelligence in a previous post. There are many people who believe and make very good arguments suggesting these most basic building blocks of life are intelligent and we can interact with them. The best known example is:
http://www.whatthebleep.com/index2.shtml
It is strange shit. I am more compelled to believe there is no type of human interaction or connection to the quantum world. But, it you have not check it out
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

An electron is either a particle or a wave. In the physical world we see unless you were an very very rare birth or take medication/had surgery you are either male or you either are female. A particle is a particle and a wave is a wave. It is my understanding in this physical world/dimension we play in "it is what it is". You can not be both a male and a female. A gun is not a pen it is a gun. A particle is not a wave - it is a particle.

Definitions of particle on the Web:

* atom: (nontechnical usage) a tiny piece of anything
* a body having finite mass and internal structure but negligible dimensions
* a function word that can be used in English to form phrasal verbs

Definitions of wave on the Web:

* one of a series of ridges that moves across the surface of a liquid (especially across a large body of water)
* a movement like that of a sudden occurrence or increase in a specified phenomenon; "a wave of settlers"; "troops advancing in waves"
* (physics) a movement up and down or back and forth
* something that rises rapidly; "a wave of emotion swept over him"; "there was a sudden wave of buying before the market closed"; "a wave of conservatism in the country led by the hard right"

Again, in the world we see, live in and interact with a wave is a wave. A particle is a particle. Uniformity in nature allows science to differentiate 'this'(wave) from that(particle). Here is just a random quote about an electron which demonstrates it can not be both at once:

When we were discussing electric currents, and resistances, we viewed the electrons as tiny point particles with a certain mass and electric charge. Resistance was then said to arise from the collisions of electrons with other particles in a wire. This view of the electron as a particle is certainly correct in this situation; the electron here cannot be thought of as a wave.
modtech@theory.uwinnipeg.ca

You were somewhat correct. It is interference from our attempt to measure it that 'changes' the electron. However, here are the labs conducting the study with their results rather than cartoons or 'popular' explainations

http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000...two-slit3.html

and another lab that has conducted such tests

http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/pdfs/Double-Slit.pdf

It is the interference/non interference which is responsible for the queerness of the electron not the speed:
The interactions are not provoked by the particle itself but by the force carriers that it
emits (generally the virtual photons). When a detector detects an electron, it does not
really “touch” the electron or even “see” it, it interacts with its electromagnetic field
(with its virtual photons). The electron is emitting continuously a cloud of virtual photons that surrounds it.

During this experiment we actually never see the electron, as described in the link above, our attempt to measure them 'disrupts' them. On this scale.... On this level demonstrated time and time again some of the most basic building blocks have the ability to be both a wave and a particle. The interaction, interference or observation(poor word) can 'change' the electron. On a quantum scale the basic building blocks of life can be this or that. They can violate the law I mentioned before: "It is what it is".

The truth is we do not fully understand this crazy stuff yet. Like god rushes in to fill these gaps pseudo-science/zen science(What The Bleep Do We Know) rushes in to fill the gaps.

It is my understanding modern science believes this ability to be a wave or a particle in the quantum world is wave-particle duality:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mod1.html#c3

Quantum Physics is tricky. The information which is intended for people without the background to understand is not intentionally misleading. However, much of the information which is presented is very watered down.

I present this guy as an example. He is 'the grand-dad' of some important stuff relevant to this topic. In much if not all of his research he will not slow down if you to not have the background to follow along. Even if you do most still fall short:
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/v/_7OEzyEfzgg&hl=en&fs=1&[/YOUTUBE]
So, the quantum world violates much of the reality our world can not. I understand this also where the string theory begins. Like the w/p duality the string theory suggests particles with pure potential to be this, that, that or this pending on their unique vibration.

Anything to add? Change? All this is WEIRD!

Originally Posted by Louis

Hawkings' books for lay people are great resources. He goes into some detail about the double slit experiment in "A Briefer History of Time". His "The Universe in a Nutshell" contains the latest on quantum theory. Highly accessible books on complicated subjects. I recommend.

There is tons of material on it for me the lay person. I've looked at a lot of it and understand some of it. After looking at my message it was long. Although a little confusing I presented the information I am reviewing in attempt to better understand this specific topic/concept.

In the quantum world, the one which holds the most basic building blocks of everything, the laws that describe(apply to) our physical world do not apply there. With that said the laws in our are correct and work just fine. That is odd in itself.

An electron or the 'things' which make up an electron have the ability(some say potential) to be 2 thing. When it is measured the interference from the measurement 'disturbs' it. This 'changes' it into a particle (collapsing) the wave function or vice-versa.

My dog can not change into a cat. An acorn if planted turns into a tree. A planted acorn will never 'grow into' a theist. It does not have the ability/potential to do anything else. The laws(natural/physical) that govern the acorn command it to act a specific way. Electrons are 'allowed' to make changes we are not - they do so with no regard to 'our' law.

What we define as impossible takes place in the quantum world. How is that possible LOL.

This is my understanding. Is it correct? Is this really how it is? My only choice to continue study here is to drop what I know and accept the facts of research? How do you understand it

Originally Posted by AntiTheist

-This is long. I will need to edit it, I bet. There might be typo's poor grammar and mistakes. I am tired and will edit later.

Just going to mention here that there's a time limit on how long you have before you can't edit anymore. I think it's ~15mins.

Originally Posted by AntiTheist

The word observed only seems used in "popular" text or when speaking to an audience which lacks an 8 year degree like myself.

I'm confused, over and over you claim to have only a basic readers knowledge of the topics, then you say you have an eight year degree?

Originally Posted by AntiTheist

It is interesting you bring this up. I am not sure what you are referring to here. I have read no scientific study which has arrived at this conclusion. Possibly I need to read much more.

Once you get passed the "childish" (for lack of a better word) elements of the videos, they cover this topic.

Originally Posted by AntiTheist

But this speed or 'ability' to be in many places at once suggests omnipresence. Quantum Entanglement is the ability for the most basic building blocks of everything to interact over any distance instantly as if space-time did not exist.

No it doesn't, it suggests the ability to move so fast that it can exist, for a fraction of a fraction of a second, in two places at once. It's possible that to do this, it is slipping into another dimension before reentering ours.

Originally Posted by AntiTheist

*I realize there is most likely a physical explanation for this. I playfully said possibly it demonstrates some form of intelligence in a previous post.

I didn't catch the "playfulness" of your tone, the downfall of internet discussions.

Originally Posted by AntiTheist

An electron is either a particle or a wave. In the physical world we see unless you were an very very rare birth or take medication/had surgery you are either male or you either are female. A particle is a particle and a wave is a wave. It is my understanding in this physical world/dimension we play in "it is what it is". You can not be both a male and a female. A gun is not a pen it is a gun. A particle is not a wave - it is a particle.

As you yourself said however, things at a Quantum level do not follow our laws. There is no reason to think that an electron could not behave as a wave in one instance and a particle in another. That's not to say that when it happen, it's not the very very rare birth of a Quantum hermaphrodite however.

Originally Posted by AntiTheist

You were somewhat correct. It is interference from our attempt to measure it that 'changes' the electron. However, here are the labs conducting the study with their results rather than cartoons or 'popular' explainations

I find it absolutely hilarious that you criticize my link for being cartoony yet when I open yours, the first thing I see is a cartoon soldier firing a gun at two slits. That and the first one just restates the video anyways! I'll read the second one on the weekend, it's a little too heavy for me to go over right now.

Originally Posted by Kiefer

Originally Posted by AntiTheist

The word observed only seems used in "popular" text or when speaking to an audience which lacks an 8 year degree like myself.

I'm confused, over and over you claim to have only a basic readers knowledge of the topics, then you say you have an eight year degree?

Hmm... That confused me too, but I think what he meant was that he is one of the people lacking an 8 year degree; he could have put it this way: "...or when speaking to an audience, like myself, which lacks an 8 year degree."

Originally Posted by AntiTheist

Can you tell me where I should obtain more information on theory/concept? I am interested.

Most of my information comes from those videos, and a couple of YouTube users. I'll openly admit that I'm no expert on the topics however.

Originally Posted by AntiTheist

That is absolutely fascinating though isn't it? That the impossible in the world we interact with is possible in the invisible, possibly rightfully considered beyond microscopic, realm of the quantum world? Yet, this quantum world is where the most basic building blocks of life are found. It violates everything we know, yet is responsible for everything we know. Even professional researchers often admit such concepts are difficult for them to grasp. Brian Greene & Brian Cox often state this with clarity.

Yes it is fascinating, to put it lightly. Advances in Quantum Mechanics have the potential to completely re write science as we know it.

Originally Posted by AntiTheist

This post seemed more like an attack. I guess you are just pissed about the cartoon comment. Can I retract it? I apologize I wish to look into this with just more than one reference - cartoon or not. You made no effort to address any of my questions. You did attempt to pull apart non-relevant parts of my post on more than one occasion.

That was not meant as an attack in any way, I am genuinely confused and seeking an answer to the question.

On an off note, do you think you could refrain from using bold, italic, and underline on your entire post? It makes responding a clusterfuck.