4 ms·
"Researchers were puzzled"... - I doubt they were, "Softpedia". This is entirely expected and in line with all previous results. For example http://physicsworld
by Jabbles 15y ago
"Researchers were puzzled"... - I doubt they were, "Softpedia". This is entirely expected and in line with all previous results. For example http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2952 http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2952
That's not to say it was a waste by any means - the techniques used will hopefully be useful to other scientists, and confirmation is always good :)
- dhimes 15y agoIt will be fascinating to see the transition between the small, definitely-quantum realm, and the intermediate, quantum-effects-get-washed-out-by-X realm. X = ? Size? Internal entropy?
- onemoreact 15y agoThe more fascinating question for me is can you demonstrate the double slit experiment on something small enough that you can detect the effect in two separate scales with the same object.
- dhimes 15y agoDo you mean like seeing the diffraction envelope of the two-slit experiment?
- onemoreact 15y agoI mean build 1,000 tiny devices can preform the two-slit experiment. Repeat the two-slit experiment using those devices as the projectiles. Then see if the internal decoherence counts as external decoherence. PS: I have no idea if this is possible, or what other QM equivalents of this might be.
- dhimes 15y agoThat would be a cool experiment. I would wonder if, in measuring two superimposed patterns, the order of measuring is important. Does measuring the small pattern destroy the large and vice-versa?
- powertower 15y agoIt probably has just as much to do with the speed of the "thing", as the size of the "thing". If you could send a cluster of molecules at relative speeds (to c) through a double-slit setup, you might get the pattern.