Originally posted by James1982
It's NOT that we are observing it that is causing any change, it's the WAY we are observing it.
That was my initial impression as well, although you would expect a scientist able to perform this experiment to also understand that basic fact?
This topic is very interesting, and I should also state that I was consistently top of my class in all of my physics & math courses in college. It my
conclusion that the "uncertainty" observed in quantum-mechanics is not the fundamental nature of what is happening, but an effect of something else
we don't yet fully understand. Kind of like observing a mirage in the desert -- it appears real, but it's really an illusion of something that does
exist which we can't clearly observe; we think it's shimmering and moving around, but that is an illusion. So what really causes quantum effects?
Higher-dimensionality is my personal guess right now, especially given the dual nature of many of these effects.
Why can exactly 2
electrons share an orbit? "They have different spin" -- ohh, ok. Hey wait, what does that MEAN in human terms? "It is
just an incomprehensible fundamental property of quantum mechanics, we can't really comprehend it, it just is
" = cop out. How about this for
a more sensible explanation -- one electron is partially extruding above our perceived 3D space, the other is partially extruding below it. They can
occupy "the same space" because they're each slightly displaced in a 4th spatial dimension.
Extra-dimensionality also seems to explain quantum tunneling. "We can't explain how the particle got out of the box, it just got out through a
mysterious property of quantum mechanics by which particles can somehow pass through solid walls." Um, no. Actually it just moved slightly into a
4th spatial dimension and got out that way.
To me, Occam's Razor slices right through traditional q-mech interpretation.
As for the single-photon double-slit -- I would urge avoiding jumping to unfounded conclusions. First off, where is the proof that only single
photons were fired? Secondly, where is the proof that these measuring instruments "which pushed the photons into 2 beams instead of 3" didn't
physically affect the results? The way they drew the detectors in the CGI diagram, it sure looked like they would affect the results.
And if there is no flaw in the experiment -- well I'll have to think about it a bit more. One possibility that strikes me initially is this -- what
if there's no such thing as a "single photon"?