Down The Rabbit Hole of the Double Slit Experiment | Answers With Joe

The Double Slit Experiment started as a way to determine if light is a wave or a particle - but it uncovered mysteries that have baffled science to this day.
-------
This subject is really complicated, so I borrowed footage from these videos. Go check them out because they are fantastic and will help shed further light on the subject (pun intended).
Veritasium Single Photon Interference
• Single Photon Interfer...
Veritasium original double slit experiment
• The Original Double Sl...
TechLaboratories DIY
• How To Make Your Own D...
Dr. Quantum (from the movie What The Bleep Do We Know?)
• Video
===============
Subscribe!
/ @joescott
Follow me!
/ answerswithjoe
/ joescottwriter
/ www
Also, you can find me on Periscope and Blab at @joescottwriter
===============
In the late 1600’s it was pretty much settled science that light traveled as a particle.
There had been many experiments that seemed to back this up and it even had the support of Sir Isaac Newton.
But then a physicist named Thomas Young created the double-slit experiment. The thinking was, if light were traveling as a particle, it would create 2 parallel lines on the background, because the particles that are passing through the two slits would hit the wall behind those two slits.
Instead, he got an interference pattern. This can only happen if the light was traveling as a wave. But other experiments proved light was a particle. Somehow light functioned both as a particle and as a wave.
This was known as the wave-particle duality.
in the 1920's, physicists added another layer to the experiment when they fired photons through one at a time, amazingly still getting the interference pattern.
This proved that the photons were going through both slits at the same time and interfering with themselves.
This is because quantum particles travel in a wave function of potentials, only returning to the particle state when the wave function collapses.
Adding to the weirdness was another extension of the Double Slit Experiment - the Which Way variation.
In this experiment, they placed a tiny detector on one of the slits. Surprisingly, the pattern on the back wall of the experiment was a particle pattern. This means the wave function collapsed before it went through the slits. Why? Because it was being observed.
It was the act of observing the particle that caused its wave form to collapse. This cannot be explained to this day.
Yet another layer of weirdness is the Delayed Choice experiment conducted by John Archibald Wheeler.
In this, he added a second double slit that changes while the photon is in mid-flight. The results showed that by changing the nature of the second slit, it altered the behavior of the particle at the first slit.
In other words, this particle was being altered by things that hadn’t happened yet. Future events can change the present.
When Thomas Young created the double slit experiment, he had no idea the endless stream of mysteries this would create. Who knows what mysteries still await us...

[@OReely444]

The most unsettling aspect of this experiment is how little attention it has received considering how fascinating it is.

[@c.t3387]

This may be the single most important experiment ever.

[@lilkane6865]

It very well may be the first proof that were in a simulation

[@jarheadmstr]

Lil kane matrix

[@naakatube]

C. T THERE IS A BIG MISTAKE IN THE OTHER-WAY GREAT EXPLANATION THE LIGHT IS NOT JUST BEING OBSERVED, SINCE THE DETECTOR INTERACTS WITH IT. SO IT DOES NOT KNOW THAT IT IS OBSERVED... LIGHT HAS NO CONSCIOUSNESS. IT JUST STUMBLE INTO THE DETECTION TOOL (OR ITS WAVES USED TO DETECT) AND COLLAPSES IN A PARTICLE, JUST AS AGAINST THE WALL. BUT SINCE IT COLLAPSES BEFORE INTERACTING WITH ITSELF, NO DIFFRACTION PATTERN IS GENERATED.

[@THE-X-Force]

@@naakatube What?

[@zhaow4832]

@@naakatube its not that simple. If it was this wouldn't be a debate. the detectors are placed way after the slits as with the delayed choice experiment/quantum eraser experiments which means they are detected significantly after they have already passed through the slit. Turning on the detection "retroactively" reverts the pattern to a particle pattern and turning it off gives you the interference pattern.

[@cameronosborne7405]

One more thing, the most mind boggling part of the experiment was left out of this video... where a detection mechanism was placed directly AFTER the slit. The waveforms collapsed BEFORE the slit indicating that beyond the slit the particles “knew” they were “going to be observed” and therefore “should act like particles”.

[@uservemewell]

That's wild

[@mysticjedi6730]

No. What's happening is the virtual reality rendering engine does not render what no one is looking at or track the movement of every particle in the universe. That is a huge waste of computational resources... so it cheats and uses probability distributions.. it saves more than 99% computational resources that way.. It works on the large scale. Open a room door at your house and probability distribution collapses and you see what's likely.. more dust on surfaces in line with possibility.. This is a simulation.. you are a consciousness floating in a dark void receiving a data stream representing your avatar. Part of a larger source. Welcome to entity school. Your purpose here is to gain experience, create information, lower your entropy as a being, help the larger source evolve.. The inner workings of the universe are all explained my simulation theory.. yes there is a conscious information system rendering and computing this simulation.. get over it..

[@slicingonions4398]

@@mysticjedi6730 maybe, maybe not. Being in a simulation certainly doesn't explain everything away if anything it brings up many more questions like why did someone start the simulation and did whoever start our simulation also come from a simulated world? What happens to an individual conscience when it dies in the simulation? To say "we're in a simulation get over it" is the same amount of ignorance as someone saying "God made it so get over it" us being in a simulation really doesn't change much of anything we still have to goto work tomorrow and in terms of the universe we already knew about our insignificance, the only thing significant we can change is in our own lives with our loved ones

[@mysticjedi6730]

@@slicingonions4398 I have experienced the void. It is absolutely real. Humanity realizing this will have serious implications for how we treat each other.. People will realize no one gets away with anything.. ( they are evolving or de evolving from their choices) there is very long term implications personally for all of us.. If you are not familiar I strongly suggest reading tom campbells my big toe trilogy of books available free on Google books and his longer lectures on simulation theory.. Experiencing the void, accessing and verifying your own past life data, etc.. it changes you... You realize you need to lower your entropy in every choice you make through your intent.. and you will be fine in the end...

[@plasticbudgie]

@@mysticjedi6730 But on that, A.I would need to run it right ? And A.I is able to resolve an error such as let's say for arguments sake Deja Vu couldn't be considered a glitch. Wouldn't it by now go on correct the issue ?

[@HardRockMiner]

What I learned: Light particles don't like being watched.

[@Arigator2]

The other name for the double slit experiment is manage a trois.

[@kalechips5972]

It wasn't light particles. That was the first experiment. The second was electrons.

[@nothingnerdyNtertainment]

Ooor they really like being watched 😂

[@SKAron25]

I guess me and Light particles have something in common, then.

[@ArchersPlace]

HardRockMiner we are pervs to light particles... maybe?

[@marc0523]

I have had this experiment explained to me over 5 times. Every time I understand it less.

[@kylebushnell2601]

It’s not extremely complex. Maybe go back to work particles and or waves are and represent then check it again😎

[@tonyharris9920]

We're creating Reality by being The Observer we're collapsing the wave form function

[@tonyharris9920]

Here's an easy way to understand it. The houses that you see on the side of the road that you drive by in your car. There is nobody ins those houses until You jump out of the car run over to the house. Your brain make what in front of you. There's nobody in those houses while you are in the car insde the house. There is just probability waves. Once you see who in in the house you manafest. them from thewave onto an object. When you jump out of your car and run over to the houses you're actually creating the person that's come out that's in the house. Does a tree falls in the woods and make a noise. No. Not until you're see or hear it in forest it doesnot exti unil you see it . Your Consciousness collapse the wave form function and make the object real. You collapse the waveform function and make the object real . reality. the particles Into existence and now they become a permanent object. In time. yokzbin.info/www/bejne/oYDGgXuFf5x6d7OpYou're the Observer It doesn't exist .Wherever you go there

[@tonyharris9920]

The houses that you see on the Side of you do not exist until you look at them you're the Observer house

[@tonyharris9920]

Nothing exists until you look at it

[@sanguinesoulful]

Every time I hear someone talk about this, I have this moment of dawning, like, "...ohhhh, yeah, ok...wait....no. Nope. I don't get it." u.u

[@naakatube]

sanguinesoulful THERE IS A BIG MISTAKE IN THE OTHER-WAY GREAT EXPLANATION THE LIGHT IS NOT JUST BEING OBSERVED, SINCE THE DETECTOR INTERACTS WITH IT. SO IT DOES NOT KNOW THAT IT IS OBSERVED... LIGHT HAS NO CONSCIOUSNESS. IT JUST STUMBLE INTO THE DETECTION TOOL (OR ITS WAVES USED TO DETECT) AND COLLAPSES IN A PARTICLE, JUST AS AGAINST THE WALL. BUT SINCE IT COLLAPSES BEFORE INTERACTING WITH ITSELF, NO DIFFRACTION PATTERN IS GENERATED.

[@naakatube]

sanguinesoulful THERE IS A BIG MISTAKE IN THE OTHER-WAY GREAT EXPLANATION THE LIGHT IS NOT JUST BEING OBSERVED, SINCE THE DETECTOR INTERACTS WITH IT. SO IT DOES NOT KNOW THAT IT IS OBSERVED... LIGHT HAS NO CONSCIOUSNESS. IT JUST STUMBLE INTO THE DETECTION TOOL (OR ITS WAVES USED TO DETECT) AND COLLAPSES IN A PARTICLE, JUST AS AGAINST THE WALL. BUT SINCE IT COLLAPSES BEFORE INTERACTING WITH ITSELF, NO DIFFRACTION PATTERN IS GENERATED.

[@kepler_0008]

Try this one. It helped me a lot kzbin.info/www/bejne/n6qxY2qIbLp3pKs

[@Jmvars]

When I first heard about it actually changing when observed my mind was blown. I literally said out loud "there is NO WAY that happens!" It just seems unbelievable and surreal.

[@FreeSkeptic]

The "which way detector" is an active detector. Human eyes are passive detectors. The which way detector actually alters one slit's wave pattern such that it does not interfere with the other slit. Hence no interference is interpeted as particle behavior. Observation itself has nothing to do with the change. Some have speculated that this experiment somehow proves consciousness extends beyond the mind.

[@DeepThinker193]

I agree. I believe the detector is altering the results. Nothing more nothing less. Because the behavior is consistent it's obviously not 'a flaw in the matrix'@@FreeSkeptic

[@JeffSpurlock]

I'm five years late but there seems to still be conversation here. My favorite interpretation of these results is not that the act of observation collapses the wave function, but that when we measure it, it becomes entangled in its environment. This gets into the Everettian interpretation of quantum mechanics, and removes the collapsing of the wave function as a piece of QM. Instead, all possible outcomes really exist in different branches of the wave function, and by detecting it at the slit, you've limited the possible outcomes of its position because you are also entangled with the environment that the particle becomes entangled with. Not only does Everettian QM provide an explanation for the double slit experiment, it provides an explanation for the Delayed Choice and Quantum Eraser variations of the the double slit experiment. Whats more is, it doesn't just provide a framework that makes these outcomes make sense, it is the expected behavior. But, we have to come to grips with the mind boggling strangeness of the idea that every possible reality that ever could have happened from the beginning of the universe up til now and beyond all exists in a real quantum superposition. There's a branches where i've died of cancer, branches where the nuclear bomb at hiroshima didn't fire, a branches where our sun and solar system never formed; but we will never access them. Sean Carroll goes further in his book Something Deeply Hidden, where he then uses Everettian QM to derive spacetime from entanglement, and gravity as an emergent property of entangled particles; eliminating the need to quantize gravity, something we have been trying to do for nearly a century with no success. It allows QM and GR to play nice.

[@Sharperthanu1]

Question:Why isn't the wave function entangled with its environment BEFORE we measure it?

[@MichaelAS007]

@@Sharperthanu1 My brain just exploded.

[@Sharperthanu1]

@@MichaelAS007 I know.It's a lot to think about.

[@anonymususer1728]

@@Sharperthanu1 "Question:Why isn't the wave function entangled with its environment BEFORE we measure it?" In a way that's what I want to know. More specifically, what events make the wave function collapse ? I mean, even in the vacuum of space there's still something, there is no (truly) empty space. In our world there's also air, and lots of light (these experiments are not done in the dark, right ?). So why isn't the wave function collapsing all the time ?

[@schmetterling4477]

First of all, there is no collapse of the wave function. The wave function is not a physical object. Secondly, entanglement is a reversible process. Measurement is, by definition, irreversible. More precisely, measurement is irreversible energy transfer and if you do a measurement on a quantum system, then you have irreversibly destroyed the system.

[@curiosity_saved_the_cat]

"Let me know what you think" I think I just found a couple of hours worth of great video's on your channel. Will be watching them all.

[@joescott]

+curiosity saved the cat sweet! I just created some playlists that are kind-of my greatest hits. Check them out on my channel page. 👍👍👍

[@saladler]

Joe Scott Your video is one of the best I've seen for a laymen like myself. Comprehensive, covering the most major areas, yet simple enough for me to understand. Thanks.

[@ehrenloudermilk1053]

curiosity saved the cat same boat. It's a pretty sweet boat

[@Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time]

This is an invitation to see a theory on the physics of light and time!

[@driverjamescopeland]

I have a theory, concerning "observation wave collapse"... The field emitted by the test equipment induced union among the photons. Photons are, by nature, charged particles... as such, they are sensitive to any fields within their environment and must react to them.

[@irrelevant2235]

Towards the end, at 5:54, you mentioned "How does conscious observation change the nature of matter?". The fact is conscious observation does not collapse the wave function, measurement does. There is a distinct difference between the two. Great video, thanks for posting.

[@JoeL-kn9tc]

You're correct. I would like to know what the "measurement" procedure is. A tape with inches and feet? What is the process scientists use to "measure" light waves/particles?

[@bettersteps]

Good point. But, the measurement is a record of something in a collapsed state because it needs to be. The information is preserved/a record for eventual conscious observation. A delayed, conscious observation is still a conscious observation. The particles can't be tricked. I've always felt this behavior, and how entangled particles behave, to ultimately be connected.

[@elpelagabriel1755]

maybe as thw water in the tank experiment. the light is in fact a particle that avels in waves, and thats it. the observation with electrical devices afect them

[@_Shtosh_]

@@elpelagabriel1755 or the light is always the wave which can be observed only when it collapsed to a point-object state. the measurement (interaction) collapses the wave (making it concentrated in space coordinates)

[@chriswilkins2643]

@@JoeL-kn9tc there is no measure.. it just conscious observation

[@jamescox6954]

Single best Double Slit Experiment video I've found (and I'm a collector)

[@spectrumelectrum1008]

This experiment is just a bug in our simulation, they forgot to code this part of physics

[@jennymills23]

You mean a simulation of the higher dimension

[@jackwagner3335]

Double slit experiments kinda support the simulation theory in such a way that our reality/universe blinks in of existence only when needed or when someone's looking. Very similar to computer games where graphics are being renderred only when the character has to interact with the environment which needs to be renderred. What a great and clever way to save up on processing and computing resources :) Just my 2 cents

[@10418]

So that means that you… are Player 1.

[@beansdork]

i kinda disagree

[@andersask5503]

No, u are a npc from my perspective and I'm a npc from your perspective. They trick us. Life is just a ride along tram lines but we are tricked to feel free.

[@Jacob_Overby]

That kind of thinking is from the preceptive of our limitation of computing, Jesus Christ is alive and well, the truth is always there :)

[@SDM496]

Universe is all Maya (illusion) is what Hinduism says.

[@loopghost]

There is no need to introduce “consciousness” into the description. Once any information is gleaned about the electron, it’s fundamentally changed. It takes a energy to retrieve information from the probability wave function, and that inspection (be it light, or a detector) changes the probability from anywhere to somewhere. All “which way” data that you can have will always require you to alter the probability. The only way you can ever have an interference pattern is if you have no information about the electron, which would keep it traveling through both slits and interfering on the other side of the slits. Collapse anywhere, and the wave becomes localized.

[@unknownuser8838]

THANK YOU. It's extremely frustrating hearing people say things like, "when you LOOK at it," as if when a human scientist's eyeballs are "watching" the experiment. It's because the detector ITSELF interferes with the wave. Misunderstanding these opens the door to so much woo and pseudoscience.

[@gerardjones7881]

@@unknownuser8838 not so fast. They put the detector behind the screen. After the particle had passed through the slits.

[@danricci7855]

Here is the problem with what you are saying. It is true that making an observation (measurement) has some affect (even if very minute) on the photon, but how does it know if someone is taking a measurement (watching) , or if it is just passing by something else that just happens to be there like say a gravitational force, or some other particle, or some small piece of matter?

[@gerardjones7881]

@@danricci7855 Reality is always watching, the information is censored, so we cannot know. Even when the measurement occurs after the event , it changes itself backward in time. The common denominator is knowledge, if we gain knowledge of the system it self censures.

[@danricci7855]

@@gerardjones7881 Yes it appears that it could be that the photon knows what the future is and adjusts accordingly, but if that were true then that would be deterministic, whereas quantum data strongly shows randomness, not determinism.

[@fritzcampbell6132]

I really appreciate your no nonsense explanation//description of your topics. Thx

[@rmichaud47]

Yah this one was bad

[@DarrylFeilen]

There seem to be two schools of thought. 1) I've heard that the "observation process" collapses the wave function. By this people are thinking that a conscious observer (or something special about the organic matter making observations) is influential on matter being observed. I can see why this is attractive as we are organisms made up of the very particles in observation. As we see a great deal of connection in all phenomena throughout the course of our daily lives... certainly we'd like to see this same connection at more fundamental levels too. But then there is 2) And from this I've heard that it's the "MEASURING PROCESS" that collapses the wave function. And I need to be very clear here that I'm talking about MEASUREMENT and not conscious observation. This to me suggest that the matter we are dealing with is so small in magnification that the properties with which we extract measurement are inaccessible (kind of like a truck scale weighing a piece of dust). So my questions from this video and these two different schools of thought is.... What is really collapsing the wave function? Is it consciousness or measurement? I don't think these two things are the same. There must be more conclusive data and experimentation with which we can affirmatively rule out or tie in consciousness. If it's measurement... and this is creating the major difference in the double slit experiment... what are the fundamental properties of measurement? A measuring device and its process must be in some way composed of the very matter being measured. Another way to say this might be to say...."One hand can shake another... but a single hand cannot experience the 'hand shake' by itself.' We're approaching a point where matter cannot deliver an understanding of itself now matter how it's re-assembled for the purposes of the question. Even Allan Watts the philosopher said too. "The Godhead cannot be the object of its own knowledge".... fire cannot burn itself, the tongue cannot taste itself... teeth cannot chew themselves... etc etc. At the end of the day..... Matter might not be able to explain itself.. (or Matter to itself). I have no Physics background whatsoever.....but this stuff does seem quite important and has contributed to our lives greatly... therefore I do try to understand. :)

[@MySerpentine]

We're trying to understand reality with brains designed for finding better berries. I don't think it's going to work too well.

[@poe12]

Its 2. Measurements.

[@4Leka]

Indeed the measurements are not passive. This has the same dilemma as our attempts to study signs of life on Mars: To analyze the samples that our rovers collect, we INCINERATE the samples. Even if Curiosity collected a bunch of Martian microbes, we still wouldn't "observe" that as anything other that traces of organic compounds. Because we incinerated the microbes to "observe" them.

[@Maxgamer-fd7hv]

@@MySerpentine Think the "better berries" as better understanding of our universe to make it work well.

[@MySerpentine]

@@Maxgamer-fd7hv Just because you want to understand the universe doesn't mean you're equipped to. We did not evolve to understand it, just to survive it. There could be all kinds of things we will never be able to detect or comprehend because it was irrelevant to life on Earth.

[@seffy333]

Thank you so much. I’ve been obsessed with quantum mechanics videos for the past two years and non of the videos I’ve watch have defined what measurement or observance is until yours.

[@FreeSkeptic]

The "which way detector" is an active detector. Human eyes are passive detectors. The which way detector actually alters one slit's wave pattern such that it does not interfere with the other slit. Hence no interference is interpeted as particle behavior. Observation itself has nothing to do with the change. Some have speculated that this experiment somehow proves consciousness extends beyond the mind.

[@anthonythomas1735]

From this point going forward I shall address you as "Lord Joe Archibald Scott"...Bringer of wisdom and humour and......Stuff!

[@joescott]

I'll allow it.

[@kylebushnell2601]

Dude! One of the best, maybe the best analysis or summary of the wave particle collapse/double slit experiment and beyond. Bravo, homie

[@PeterMancini]

There is a version of this experiment where detectors on the slit determine which one the photon passed through, and there are two observers. One has the detector information and the other doesn't and both patterns emerge! So two observers can see very different versions of reality.

[@kjh311]

"There is no spoon"

[@Trident_Euclid]

kjh311 Only pizza

[@jscottupton]

You are the one.

[@natemullikin]

And thus no supper.

[@bemm6035]

kjh311 as i eat my cereal, your argument is fallicous

[@bemm6035]

J Scott Upton ;)

[@duderama6750]

I found the Kubrick variation to be the best. He used a pair of entangled party girls to demonstrate the double slit experiment in Eyes Wide Shut. I took a hard look at the data and came away satisfied. Perhaps if I had kept my eyes shut, my waveform wouldn't have collapsed into a load of messy particles. I will power my photon gun at a higher frequency, and attempt to extend the waveform indefinitely, a sort of tantric experiment, te he! Let's hope that i don't blow it by peeking too soon.

[@edhammertime]

Frkn' genius

[@teeth6556]

Is that light traveling as a wave, or is it just happy to see me?

[@DR-mq1vn]

Joe, I finally understand it all after watching your video! I have never been able to understand this experiment until you explained it. You explained it in a way that I understood! Thanks!

[@FreeSkeptic]

The "which way detector" is an active detector. Human eyes are passive detectors. The which way detector actually alters one slit's wave pattern such that it does not interfere with the other slit. Hence no interference is interpeted as particle behavior. Observation itself has nothing to do with the change. Some have speculated that this experiment somehow proves consciousness extends beyond the mind.

[@intothemaze8865]

Your best episode ever, Archibold. I literally don't know how many times I've watched it.

[@ShaunSommer]

So I have been watching hours and hours of your videos now. It's fun to see the changing background from these old ones to the new ones, plus I see the "You See Cam" changed to the "Tangent Cam" when about did that changeover happen?

[@SkysMomma]

This seriously keeps me up at night. Would like you to do a video that talks about the different kinds of matter that have worked the same way in the double slit experiment and ones that haven't.

[@joescott]

It's a head scratcher.

[@Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time]

Me too! It is not just looking! Even in the two slit experiment it is turning on an electronic detector the collapses the wavefunction Ψ. This video explains the experiment: kzbin.info/www/bejne/g4WnqIibftSfd7M

[@aaroncurtis8545]

@@Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time that's an empirically disproven statement based on a lie. Like, actually contemplate the last 120 years of experimental results, and that becomes obvious.

[@FreeSkeptic]

The "which way detector" is an active detector. Human eyes are passive detectors. The which way detector actually alters one slit's wave pattern such that it does not interfere with the other slit. Hence no interference is interpeted as particle behavior. Observation itself has nothing to do with the change. Some have speculated that this experiment somehow proves consciousness extends beyond the mind.

[@FrankClark]

congrats on being the first person to explain this to me in a way i finally understand!

[@joemulkerins5250]

This is the best explanation of this experiment imo, that I would recommend a friend to watch. Kudos Joe.

[@doctordoubledakka3939]

Yucky man, simulation theory. The light waveform exists to save processing power. When not observed an approximation is sufficient, when observed all the maths get done and a specific location is determined. Kind of like textures changing quality in a video game when an object moves from the background to the foreground. The truly terrible part is because shortcuts are being used while rendering our existence, we can be moderately certain we are not on a high end computer in a laboratory running a perfect simulation, but on some kid's playstation where you need a few tricks and shortcuts to keep things running smoothly. Our lives are some fourth dimensional baby's Fornite. What terrible DLC comes next?

[@proudpapaprick]

I hear in July, we get the "Raining Flaming Babies" expansion.

[@dudeguy5719]

Amazing theory man.

[@nealfairbanks5340]

I think God's account was hacked.

[@rodriguezelfeliz4623]

Corona update

[@naakatube]

matt FakeLastName THERE IS A BIG MISTAKE IN THE OTHER-WAY GREAT EXPLANATION THE LIGHT IS NOT JUST BEING OBSERVED, SINCE THE DETECTOR INTERACTS WITH IT. SO IT DOES NOT KNOW THAT IT IS OBSERVED... LIGHT HAS NO CONSCIOUSNESS. IT JUST STUMBLE INTO THE DETECTION TOOL (OR ITS WAVES USED TO DETECT) AND COLLAPSES IN A PARTICLE, JUST AS AGAINST THE WALL. BUT SINCE IT COLLAPSES BEFORE INTERACTING WITH ITSELF, NO DIFFRACTION PATTERN IS GENERATED

[@user-pn3fb9eo5i]

I would like you to do a whole video on the delayed choice quantum eraser. Why? Because nobody has made a good video to explain it as far as i know and you seem to have an ability to explain things really well.

[@mynameisozymandias811]

Here you go. kzbin.info/www/bejne/qaGunaObrbGSfsk

[@shadoworksphilosophy120]

Thank you for your excellent good humor, and of course the insights you provide.

[@abouthergrace3086]

I’ve watched this so many times. Love it!

[@valky5318]

So could we in theory communicate through time with this? If the observer choses to observe it will affect the outcome so by chosing and not chosing you could send a string of 1 and 0 (garbled by probability so you would have to do it a lot of the time so the recipient of the message could see the most likely message). And what Joe said means that this works back in time too so it would effectivley be instant communication even though one party will talk a lot later. But the downtime between messages would be near zero.

[@clearmist1]

Unfortunately no because in order to decipher the message you need to know the Futures pattern. That's the dumb way of saying it.

[@chrisbero2]

Sadly no because the person on the other end of the quantum entangle communicator collapses the wave function when they try to observe the particle/photon and thus have no idea if it was collapsed by your detector or theirs. All of them will be particles without the wave function so all would be ones or zeros in your scenario I think.

[@StefanAndrei6789]

@@clearmist1 let's presume future you will talk to present me 2 months from now, so now we both come up with a code that future you will be using to send messages back to present me. Easy!

[@clearmist1]

@@StefanAndrei6789 unfortunately if you look in-depth on how the test works both past and future Dot's end up on the same screen in order to know which is which you need both the information. It's hard to explain the entire process but if you find a video on it you would understand.

[@chrisbero2]

@Alex DelRio No, we would have proof that the wave function interacted with "something" physical and collapsed. Consciousness really has nothing to do with collapsing wave functions. In the double slit experiment, you can run it without a detector and see the wave pattern. You can then run the experiment with detectors that tell you which slit the particle/wave went through and you will have the particle pattern. You don't have to be in the room to consciously observe the detector. You can leave the room an go have a smoke and come back and the wave functions will still be collapsed.

[@sebastienjurkowski]

Well, if this all is a simulation, one way to optimize it is to render only what is observed.

[@alexjaybrady]

EXACTLY

[@WhySoitanly]

Flippin' hilarious! @ 5:31 Joe relieves the tension of learning QM weirdness. Brilliant pedagogical tool. Thanks, Joe, we needed that.

[@erikamohrmann7986]

idk if youll see this on a video so old, but i love these science videos and i hope you do more! Theyre my favorite and i come back and watch them from time to time!

[@pendurton3081]

the double slit experiment has always been the most interesting scientific experiment ever conducted to me and I love listening to the theories people come up with in an attempt to explain the weirdness of it and the possible implications

[@FreeSkeptic]

The "which way detector" is an active detector. Human eyes are passive detectors. The which way detector actually alters one slit's wave pattern such that it does not interfere with the other slit. Hence no interference is interpeted as particle behavior. Observation itself has nothing to do with the change. Some have speculated that this experiment somehow proves consciousness extends beyond the mind.

[@harambe1331]

i think it can be explained by our limit as the observer. We see the world but don't see what we aren't capable of, aka 4d, and then 5d, which creates interactions between light reality time and space that we cannot concieve with sight alone but we can imagine it only by accepting that we cannot

[@danieldevito6380]

In my opinion, this is the most fascinating experiment ever conducted.

[@schmetterling4477]

Your opinions are pretty weak, Dude. ;-)

[@morpheus2610]

Very simple presentation, without any judgement. Thanks bro for putting it out there 👍🏼

[@leonardodausa3963]

...right amount of humor...very charming presentation of Phenomenon with depth enough to intrigue and entertain...bravo... ...all the best...

[@DallasGraves]

Anyone who understands how a rendering engine works in a video game should be able to put 2 and 2 together. The good news however; if you're reading this, congratulations, you've already made it to the singularity!

[@tinadavis6150]

obviously that detector has a bad motivator

[@Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time]

Yes I like that LOL It is not just looking! Even in the two slit experiment it is turning on an electronic detector the collapses the wavefunction Ψ. This video explains the experiment: kzbin.info/www/bejne/g4WnqIibftSfd7M

[@danieldvs100]

Tina Davis what are the chances of every detector on planet earth having a bad monitor? Cuz they all yield the same result

[@dylanmorgan5589]

Okay apparently i have to say this. I like the Star Wars reference.

[@mainsource8030]

uncle owen!

[@GameBuilder15]

What about that blue one

[@ZZTalkZZ]

Great way of explaining

[@mattsheezy5469]

Excellent job explaining this in very simple terms without any unnecessary bullshit.

[@billrandell4641]

Proving that reality is a collective hunch..

[@tonymanuge1932]

Would doing the experiment itself be an act of conscious observance?

[@awesome0sour]

What a fantastic comment!

[@sunnyjim1355]

Nope, because you could just set it up, walk away, and then come back later to see the results. Also, as was stated a few times in the vid, these experients have been run many times, in many different ways, and the results are always the same. Also, the way the experiments are set up are just for lab conditions, for ease of observation - they happen naturally in nature all the time, and is observable and predictable.

[@TheNadiabear]

'boggle boggle boggle' mind blown ,thank you Joe.

[@denisa7090]

Fascinating! I have more questions than before I watched the video

[@greendogg83]

I'm glad I'm not the only person who has failed at walking through a door

[@KM-dk5gn]

The really spotless, clean glass doors are the worst just sayin'...

[@orlandomoyah4064]

I have yet to perfect that motion

[@rossk7927]

I've always been amazed at how the universe has such strange properties as this (episode) and quantum entanglement yet in no way is it possible to send information backwards in time. For example I'm sure the very last study in this ep - to affect a photon in flight by changing the end condition of its path - could not be used to send a laser communication around the world and provide the effect of negative latency when read at the mid point by affecting the light not when sent but when returned.

[@boogathon]

It has something to do with the endochronic properties of resublimated thiotimoline. There's a thesis somewhere that goes into detail about it.

[@markbrandenburg7910]

This is one of your best!

[@johannesburgreal441]

Tom Campbell's take on the DSE is the most compelling and clear interpretation i have ever come across.

[@WBB1981]

For every action there is a reaction. Why would people expect the action of observing be any different? Legitimate question as I am struggling to get my head round this.

[@dope8878]

Because it means that the human consiousness is a lot more intertwined with life itself than we may think

[@johnm.v709]

Particle, wave.... kzbin.info/www/bejne/pJ_Op6J_fd-nhtk

[@sunnyjim1355]

Your confusion stems from you making a false equivalence. "For every action there is a reaction" is Newtonian physics, and it realates only to classical mechanics, in particular; mass and force. The 'action' in Newton's case was regarding the application of a force, not the 'action' of an observation. That's why people didn't expect the mere observation of a natural occuring phenomenon to have any effect on the experiment, because the action of observation didn't input any mechanical force into the proceedings, you see? That it did in the double-slit experiments is what blew the lid off Newtonian physics (well, that and Einstein's Theories of Relativity) and ushered in Quantum Physics.

[@HJF]

Really informative. Like the jokes too. :)

[@Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time]

This is an invitation to see a theory on the physics of light and time!

[@An.Individual]

You have some brown stuff on your nose.

[@johnd9024]

Great explanation! Very entertaining.

[@ElLenadorLA]

I was about to sleep, you’ve ruined my night. I can’t let this go now. Thanks.

[@atomicdiscobiscuit]

it's really simple... the programmer used a simple if-then-else statement to keep semi-intelligent simulator subjects (us) from learning the truth. if TEST = unobserved double slit; then PrintLn ( interference pattern); else PrintLn (particle pattern);

[@direwolf9569]

atomicdiscobiscuit Do you think the same code is used in the forest full of tenuously stable trees?

[@atomicdiscobiscuit]

@@direwolf9569 there are no trees

[@direwolf9569]

atomicdiscobiscuit .... Mandelbrot Forest?

[@atomicdiscobiscuit]

@@direwolf9569 a Fractal Cluster

[@soechisugano5956]

That is the most accurate ting NEO. You are the one Now follow the rabbit and swallow this pill. Wake up to find your kidney gone.

[@clarkjanes3094]

Little did you realize you weren't going to make this video until I saw it 5 years later.

[@Abe-rz1nm]

Love the humorous/nerdy combo :)

[@lifeisshortpeace7783]

Youre the best scientic presenter I ever seen.cheers.

[@romanrepublic1356]

My theory: the universe is alive in some state that humans can't comprehend.

[@grs6262]

That idea is as good as or maybe better than most.

[@romanrepublic1356]

@Carson Damon why?

[@naakatube]

Roman Republic THERE IS A BIG MISTAKE IN THE OTHER-WAY GREAT EXPLANATION THE LIGHT IS NOT JUST BEING OBSERVED, SINCE THE DETECTOR INTERACTS WITH IT. SO IT DOES NOT KNOW THAT IT IS OBSERVED... LIGHT HAS NO CONSCIOUSNESS. IT JUST STUMBLE INTO THE DETECTION TOOL (OR ITS WAVES USED TO DETECT) AND COLLAPSES IN A PARTICLE, JUST AS AGAINST THE WALL. BUT SINCE IT COLLAPSES BEFORE INTERACTING WITH ITSELF, NO DIFFRACTION PATTERN IS GENERATED.

[@sunnyjim1355]

@@romanrepublic1356 Probably because he believes in the big sky man.

[@Zero-tm5fc]

@@sunnyjim1355 press x to (not) doubt

[@josejuancarlosleyvaflores37]

How can you rule out the probability that the measurement interferes with the Phenomena?

[@sunnyjim1355]

DId you watch the video? It does! That's the whole point - why does it?

[@douglaswright00]

Damnit, Joe. My brain bucket overflowed. Great vid. Thanks.

[@dr.satishsharma1362]

Excellent.... thanks.

[@Bodyknock]

Observation is a terrible word, in this context it actually just means "interaction with something". It's not "consciousness" that collapses the waveform, it's that the particles are interacting with something (eg interacting with the detector) that is collapsing the wave. In the basic double slit experiment nothing the photons interact with between the slits and the back wall cause the wave to break down. In the experiments where a detector is involved between the photons and the wall the detector is collapsing the wave prior to them reaching the wall. There's no "consciousness" involved anywhere, it's all just where in the process the photons interact with something. Don't get me wrong, it's still really weird. Quantum mechanics doesn't offer an good "intuitive" explanation for why this happens, it just accurately mathematically describes what is happening. Anybody that says they actually understand WHY photons behave like they do is either probably lying or doesn't actually understand the weirdness of it. (Especially with regard to the quantum eraser experiments that Joe mentioned at the end of the video, those are really strange.) Either way though consciousness has nothing to do with it, the only reason "consciousness" comes up in videos like this is because physicists were silly enough to use the word "observation" instead of "interaction" and that leads to confusion that there is some conscious "observer" messing things up.

[@drewarnold6741]

Doug Rosengard I love this. I know very little about physics, but every time I heard a high level explanation of this experiment I would ask "what does observe/detect mean in this context?" "What mechanism are they using to observe/detect?" Then I'd think to myself "It's obviously the mechanism making the electron/photon/atom etc... act like a particle and not a wave." So what is the nature of the mechanism/detector and why are the physicists actually surprised that it collapses the wave?

[@slicedtoad]

The right word to use would be 'measured', not 'interacted'. Or maybe, "Interacted in a way which allows for a measurement of some kind." An interaction that cannot produce a measurement does not collapse the wave. If there is a consequence to a single particle going through one of the slits, then the 'wave' ceases to be undetermined and collapses into a single possibility. And because taking a measurement changes the system, it is impossible to measure everything about said system if it has more things than you can measure before you've changed it too much (uncertainty principle). It, IMO, is much easier to think about quantum physics through the lens of information theory. It ceases to be a question of how to draw analogies to the macroscopic world and becomes a question of what information is where and how does it change.

[@JC50000000]

guys please correct me if im wrong but i dont think what you are saying is correct. i dont think it was the detector that made the wave collapse or not. watch this video from around 9 minutes on, when he starts talking about the experiment done in 2012: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fmerfZ2mn5mBqpY how the 3rd person chose to measure the photon, altered what the 1st and 2nd person saw in their detectors. watch the thought experiment he explained at the end. please answer this im very curious

[@slicedtoad]

+JC, I'm not a physicist so I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure he overstepped in his explanation. As far as I understand anything that measures with consequences (as in, the measurement changes something physical, like moving something, heating something, etc) is a valid observer. A conscious mind isn't required. If you repeated the experiment (9 min) with some bots (simple logic programs capable of "deciding" how to measure the photon), you should get the same results. The takeaway from this experiment, I believe, is that you can effectively "store" a measurement in an undetermined state and then determine it after it was detected with how you later measure it's entangled twin (or whatever the terminology is). Take a look at the abstract he links, it might be more clear: arxiv.org/abs/1203.4834

[@JC50000000]

slicedtoad yes but we are talking about the "consciousness" of the particle, not the observer right? Being a robot or not its like it knows measurements are being made.

[@m1sterpunch]

Space-time is actually thought-energy and we are all just making it up as we go. Thanks for coming to my TedTalk.

[@williambaillie1422]

Fascinating episode! Thanks much for simplifying a complex topic. Maybe you could do a follow up episode on quantum eraser and retro causality. Thanks again.

[@salt-emoji]

Chill to have some of these answers, even if they only brought more questions...

[@SecularMentat]

Observed = "Measured"

[@sdfgbsfgbhsdfndsfhsd]

Yeah this really bothered me. There is no requirement for "conscious observation" for waveform collapse. This video is such woo-woo.

[@SecularMentat]

Exactly, it gets used sooooo much to support things that it simply doesn't support, it bothers me that rational people do this.

[@Curious112233]

I've heard this argument before. But it is incorrect. Consciousness is absolutely required to collapse the wave function. Not only that but it must be your own consciousness. Every measuring device, and every other observer will necessarily become integrated with the wave function, including much of your own body and brain, until your own personal consciousness requires its collapse. It makes no sense to imagine a wave function collapsing for anything else. If you think it does, please explain what physical process can cause a wave function collapse.

[@SecularMentat]

entaglement in a quantum system (IE measurement) is what alters the wave. It's not consciousness. It's measurement. If you want to consider a 'computer' conscious. Ok.

[@Curious112233]

Read about Schrodinger's cat thought experiment. It explains how a cat can be both dead and alive at the same time. How is that possible? Because from the point of view of the external observer, the wave function did not yet collapse, because the contents of the box was not yet observed. But surely the cat would qualify as a measuring device, and yet the wave function does not collapse. Instead the cat becomes integrated with the wave function. And so would any conceivable measuring device. Also imagine that Schrodinger's cat is inside Box A, and Box A and observer A is inside Box B. If observer A looks inside Box A, then observer A becomes integrated with the wave function contained in Box B. Only an observer outside Box B can collapse that wave function. If you follow this to its logical conclusion, it means that the only consciousness that can actually collapse the wave function from your point of view is your own personal consciousness.

[@marklott8551]

It gets weirder still. It isn't just photons that don't this but electrons and atoms too. I read that someone is trying to do this with a molecule the size of a small virus. If proteins can behave this way then what does that mean for biology?

[@hidude1354]

I know I'm late to this, but you always have to remember one thing. Photons are MASSLESS energy particles (or waves......), while anything else is such as electrons and atoms DO have mass. So correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe that proteins can act like this. (I'm only 12... don't judge me please xD)

[@tomszabo7350]

Everything can act like a wave including molecules (proteins), it's just that the wavelength is inversely proportional to mass so it becomes undetectable at some point (the size of a very large molecule).

[@fakename2454]

@hidude wtf

[@lawrencemiller3829]

If this experiment is performed with a living organism, say a bacteria, which is larger than a virus, would that bacteria still be alive?

[@pizzamaster355]

hidude you are very smart for a 12 year old

[@MrTmax74]

I didn’t know about that last part! Wow, we really need to figure out what’s going on. Thanks for the great video.

[@sonjeow]

Joe, love to revisit this one!

[@hannahpumpkins4359]

So many commentators here who clearly have their PhD's in Particle Physics - amazing.

[@Babarudra]

what, didn't you graduate from Internet U like everyone else?

[@simon5143]

I'm gonna say it. Any second now. It's a glitch in the Matrix. There we go.

[@naakatube]

Simon THERE IS A BIG MISTAKE IN THE OTHER-WAY GREAT EXPLANATION THE LIGHT IS NOT JUST BEING OBSERVED, SINCE THE DETECTOR INTERACTS WITH IT. SO IT DOES NOT KNOW THAT IT IS OBSERVED... LIGHT HAS NO CONSCIOUSNESS. IT JUST STUMBLE INTO THE DETECTION TOOL (OR ITS WAVES USED TO DETECT) AND COLLAPSES IN A PARTICLE, JUST AS AGAINST THE WALL. BUT SINCE IT COLLAPSES BEFORE INTERACTING WITH ITSELF, NO DIFFRACTION PATTERN IS GENERATED.

[@isaachenrikson3197]

@@naakatube bot

[@orlandomoyah4064]

@@isaachenrikson3197 they think that if the all caps are on that they would be more informative

[@zerochasingspirals9579]

Joe! We need a fresh video on this topic, please!

[@Tommyfddtec]

Mind blow!!! My fav vid Joe

[@kevinherrlin1772]

That last part first made me go, "huh?'..... Then after reflection I went.... "huh?'..... Sheesh.....

[@Skylancer727]

Quantum physics. They didn't call them quarks without reason. They make no god damn sense.

[@Fuckingwev]

I'm always wondering how does the observation equipment works? If the light source has been attenuated so only one photon is fired at a time, and the photon is busy being fired onto that slit, how does the photon interact with the sensor of the machine?

[@garbageoftomorrow]

Yeah, the "observation equipment" in this case isn't a real thing. Real experiments covered the slits with oppositely polarized filters and then determine from the result which slit a polarized photon went through. Basically, the only way to determine "which way" a photon went is to constrain it to only one way. But this obviously wouldn't result in an interference pattern. If any given photon could only go through one of the slits, even if it traveled as a wave we would only expect to see a single pile of photons on the other side (so the result is 2 piles from oppositely polarized photons). IMO, these explainer videos just make people more confused by adding in the "detector" part. In reality, it's a completely different experiment, with only one slit for each type of photon. The wave still doesn't collapse until the particle gets all the way to the end.

[@shaunrene1]

Got to love that background music

[@Qrexx1]

I discovered your channel recently and I think you improved a lot over time. This old video is just completely wrong on the topic.

[@yepezoj]

Dear Joe, you need to see the weak measurement experiment! If particles are weakly observed the interference pattern is not destroyed!

[@clearmist1]

Technically it's still gets destroyed it's just not as badly destroyed because it's not as much observed.

[@MikeBozart]

"He's watching us again. Let's flip him out."

[@edwardchance2543]

Thanks for sharing great video

[@alexandermartins65]

I do a lot of 3D modeling for architectural visualization and have to render images at the end. One way to cut on render time is to pre-calculate light bouncing in 3D space in the scene and save it as a file the reuse it for the final render. Now, i imagine that a simulated Universe must have the same mechanism that will save on render time.

[@Night60700]

This is the a quirk of how time works. For the photon, no time passes from its creation to its destination. But since we experience time differently. The reason the photon changes is because, from its perspective we are going back in time to change its timeline. Essentially it has already done what we are seeing it do. Therefore when we change something, to it, we are time traveling. So as I said, simply a quirk of time, and essentially the none existence of time at lightspeed. This is also why if you move close to lightspeed, you experience time slower than other people, essentially traveling forward in time in relation to everyone else. If you could move at lightspeed (without hitting anything) you would instantly teleport to the end of the universe. Both the end of time and the literal edge of the universe. To teleport, just move at lightspeed. This is actually the basis of the "relative" part of general relativity. So to warp everything. To the "big bang" the universe has already ended. To that blob that went "bang", the blob has already expanded to the end of the universe, while to us it's only the beginning and still expanding.

[@shirleymental4189]

Night60700 Jeez, that was a mind fk but brilliant too. Your own?

[@Night60700]

@@shirleymental4189 I wouldn't take any real credit. I'm sure Einstein probably wrote something just like that, the guy was very smart. I actually heard the photon thing from Joe Scott on his video about, why is light so slow. I don't really have any math to back anything up. I just "put 2 & 2 together" and got that. I don't honestly have any way to test it. I just used logic and reason to make sense of things that baffle so many scientists. And I'd assume others have come to the same conclusion and the thing that baffles them is trying to find the math proves that hypothesis. And math doesn't like time travel, since time travel brakes causation. Causation is the basis of all math. PS: I have other observations that talk about quantum fields and how the atom is probably the long sought Graviton.

[@demonemperor424]

night607000 please do share

[@terryforshee5203]

This theory sounds plausible.

[@CrossingTheStreetArt]

But since time wouldn't pass for the photon (or whoever was traveling at lightspeed), meaning it would take an infinite amount of time from the traveller's perspective, you would be stuck traveling forever before you got anywhere from your perspective.

[@jimawhitaker]

There you go the simulation folds under these experiments ;-)

[@vgerlightening7011]

I really admire you, SIR

[@LoisyAbigail]

The waveform collapse is soooo fascinating.

[@erairis8015]

Nice work broseph, more quantum mechanics videoooooooooos pleeeease subbed and liked :)

[@joescott]

+ERA IRiS Hehe... Thanks man!

[@Green_Shortz]

I like this "Broseph" moniker for our friend Joe. I see it as an amalgamation of Josephus (famous Jewish historian) and The Dude, from the The Big Lebowski. The Broseph abides.

[@Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time]

This is an invitation to see a theory on the physics of light and time!

[@RonRay]

Albeit three years late, I will throw in my 'particle'. When we initiate an electrical beam (i.e. turn on a light), we actually give excitation to the 'field', where the entanglement begins... causing the particles (photons) to vibrate (oscillate, i.e. wave). Since the particles are in superposition, they are "already in both places", just not yet vibrating at the other end because entanglement hasn't occurred on that other end. The excitation would travel at 186,000 miles per second. In this way, light could be expressed as a wave AND a particle in the same model. Light is a particle, being vibrated (oscillated) in superposition in a field that is expressed as a wave at the speed of entanglement (not the speed of light).

[@mikeock2087]

Someone has to check this thoerie. Sounds interesting tho

[@aaroncurtis8545]

@@mikeock2087 it's based on Quantum Electro Dynamics, QED, developed by the great Richard Feynman. He was quite disappointed to realize it comes with all the same baggage as, and explanatory problems of, treating light like a wave. Instead of the Ultraviolet Catastrophe, it creates the Vacuum Catastrophe. While some credit him with 'explaining' the DS experiments and even the phenomenon of Iridescence; he himself was well aware it didn't count as an Explanation of either phenomenon. Next theory...

[@user_16309]

Bravo sir, BRAVO!

[@plumpsgablumps]

Thank you...

[@judecieffe6769]

if photons travel at the speed of light then from their perspective time has stopped. a photon experiences the entirety of its existence simultaneously. so it doesn't seem so bizarre that it would "know" the future as it is experiencing that at the same time as our present; as one stationary line between where it started and where it ended. we measure one slice of that line and call it a photon. it's only from our perspective that it would seem odd that cause and effect are backwards. i know this doesn't really explain exactly how the photon "knows" to change the result we see, but it must be something to do with forcing a particular future to occur by knowing in advance which slot the photon went through. we can't know that information without it reducing the possible outcomes and from the photon's perspective that outcome is already happening as one static picture.

[@aaroncurtis8545]

Ok... Now explain why it happens with particles with mass.

[@barry2b225]

I replied with almost the same answer, before i read your comment, thumbs up! another thought along these lines, If the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate, would there be inertia affecting things? maybe as what we call gravity? may just be the inertial effect.

[@tomf3150]

@@aaroncurtis8545 maybe because particles don't experiment time ? Maybe they are timeless.

[@aaroncurtis8545]

@@tomf3150 yes actually; that might be part of the answer. Some have said that subatomic particles don't seem to experience entropy like molecules do, and time is just a measure of the entropy of a system to some people, so... Yeah, totally

[@b.sylphaen]

Jude Cieffe I loved this answer. Can I use it in a novel?

[@vinsanity982]

In my unprofessional, uneducated layperson understanding of it, when you "observe" it, you are using detectors. In order to detect something, you have to interact with it. It's that interaction (however it is being achieved, I don't know how the detectors do the job) that causes the waveform to collapse. It's not that the particle/wave senses your gaze or your consciousness, it's that the detector has disturbed it.

[@joeltunnah]

vinsanity982, yes. This is so obvious, it’s incredible that any educated person could think otherwise.

[@brandonchurch2094]

Joel Tunnah The eraser theory disproves this

[@juststained]

The Detector doesn't interact with the particles like you think, it just observes them and inside the detector and its software, calculations are made, just like a camera doesn't interact with you when it snaps your picture. Someone may be snapping your photo from across the yard, you wouldn't know it though. Somehow the light knows someone is hiding in the bushes, snapping their picture! This is my very slightly educated understanding anyway :-)

[@lonlonlink]

That explains that feeling of something happening before it does, even years before

[@anmoldhawan2671]

Best explained this topic

[@RM-yf2lu]

That term "settled science" is one of the most irritating unscientific terms ever coined

[@sunnyjim1355]

Whenever you hear that term you should immidiately think 'political manipulation'.

[@iasimov5960]

I think I understand. It's like cows only acting like cows when they are being observed.

[@3756hans]

Right, when nobody's looking cows: behave like "the Far Side " comics.

[@guaranteedsuccess5075]

A double “corridor” experiment would be nice. Instead of a thin barrier with two slits, 2 extended corridors(as long as the interference pattern is wide) are used. The same material as the screen should be used to line the sides of the corridor. Particles sent through these corridors would; hypothesis: display the interference pattern on the sides along the corridor.

[@phoglite]

So could one use the future / past scenario be used to communicate via EM wave over vast distances with zero latency?