Double Slit Experiment No Mystery

Re:Double Slit Experiment No Mystery by missosoup on Saturday October 26, 2019 @10:36AM (#21363915)

The author of TFA has little understanding of what they're talking about and misses all of the nuance of the double slit experiment and its relationship to other QM phenomena like the Dirac three polarizer experiment[1] and delayed choice quantum eraser experiment[2]. The three polariser experiment in particular makes it almost impossible to argue that light is a particle even if it had hidden state, unless that hidden state was propagating faster than light.

TFA reads like /r/iamverysmart content or a medium effort troll post. I don't understand how this ended up on HN frontpage.

[1] http://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/experiments/...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed-choice_quantum_eraser

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Double Slit Experiment No Mystery by grumpy8 on Saturday October 26, 2019 @10:59AM (#21364055)

I didn't know about Duane's hypothesis even though I read a few books mentioning the double slit experiment so I'm glad I read the article. In the end, as much as the wave/particle duality seems mysterious at the moment, I'm convinced we'll find a quite boring/straightforward explanation for it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Double Slit Experiment No Mystery by nobodyandproud on Saturday October 26, 2019 @02:00PM (#21365185)

The collapse of observing entangled particles can be non-local and isn’t controversial.

So why would hidden state matter? In fact, Bell’s Theorem allows this.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Double Slit Experiment No Mystery by lonelappde on Saturday October 26, 2019 @02:07PM (#21365230)

HN has never had any particular quality or accuracy filter for content, and people rarely click through links before voting.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Double Slit Experiment No Mystery by zarmin on Saturday October 26, 2019 @04:03PM (#21365856)

But...but...he read the right book.

[ Parent | on HN ]