Explaining the Double-Slit Experiment

ABSTRACT

In response to Orion and Laitman’s [1] explanation of the classic double-slit experiment of quantum mechanics, we propose an alternate explanation of that experiment by treating physical degrees of freedom as a conserved physical quantity, instead of referring to “vague terms” used in previous explanations, [1], that are not broadly applicable. Explanation in [1] refers to properties of groups of particles, even though the double-slit experiment’s results should address only to a single particle. By using physical degrees of freedom and the application of Hamilton’s principle, we obtain a single particle explanation of the double-slit experiment in terms of properties and via methods which apply equally in a quantum and a classical regime.

In response to Orion and Laitman’s [1] explanation of the classic double-slit experiment of quantum mechanics, we propose an alternate explanation of that experiment by treating physical degrees of freedom as a conserved physical quantity, instead of referring to “vague terms” used in previous explanations, [1], that are not broadly applicable. Explanation in [1] refers to properties of groups of particles, even though the double-slit experiment’s results should address only to a single particle. By using physical degrees of freedom and the application of Hamilton’s principle, we obtain a single particle explanation of the double-slit experiment in terms of properties and via methods which apply equally in a quantum and a classical regime.

Cite this paper

nullM. Callen and S. Sorek, "Explaining the Double-Slit Experiment,"*Journal of Modern Physics*, Vol. 2 No. 1, 2011, pp. 30-35. doi: 10.4236/jmp.2011.21006.

nullM. Callen and S. Sorek, "Explaining the Double-Slit Experiment,"

References

[1] Itzhak Orion and Michael Laitman, “The Double-Slit Experiment and Wave-Particle Duality: Toward a Novel Quantum Interpretation,” Journal of Modern Physics, 2010, Vol. 1, 90-92. doi:10.4236/jmp.2010.110013

[2] E. Merzbacher, “Quantum Mechanics,” 3rd Edition, Wiley, New York, 1998.

[3] J. S. Townsend, “A Modern Approach to Quantum Mechanics,” University Science, Sausalito, CA, 2000.

[4] R. B. Griffiths, “Consistent Quantum Mechanics,” Cambridge University Press, New York, 2001.

[5] H. Goldstein et al., “Classical Mechanics,” 3rd Edition, Addison-Wesley, San Francisco, 2002.

[6] L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, “Mechanics,” 3rd Edition, Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, 2001.

[7] B. d’Espagnat, “Veiled Reality,” 1st Edition, Addison- Wesley, New York, 1994.

[8] F. Lindner et al., “Attosecond Double-slit Experiment,” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 95, No. 4, 2005.

[9] K. Wang and D. Cao, “Coincidence Subwavelength Interference by a Classical Thermal Light,” Physical Review A, Vol. 70, 2004.

[10] S. P. Walborn et al., “Double-slit Quantum Eraser,” Physical Review A, Vol. 65, 2002. ArXiv: quantph/0106078 v. 1

[11] J. Xiong et al., “Experimental Observation of Classical Sub-Wavelength Interference with Thermal-Like Light,” 2004. ArXiv: quant-ph/0410020 v. 1

[12] G. Brida et al., “A First Experimental Test of De Broglie-Bohm Theory Against Standard Quantum Mechanics,” Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, Vol. 35, 2002. ArXiv: quant-ph/0206196 v. 1, 2002)

[13] A. S. Sanz and F. Borondo, “A Quantum Trajectory Description of Decoherence,” European Physical Journal D, Vol. 44, 2007. ArXiv: quantph/0310096 v. 4, 2004)

[14] M. Bozic et al., “An Asymmetric Double-Slit Interferometer for Small and Large Quantum Particles,” 2003 ArXiv: quant-ph/0305189 v. 1

[15] A. G′ozdz and M. Pietrow, “Projection evolution in quan tum mechanics,” 2003. ArXiv: quantph/0303084 v. 1

[16] P. A. M. Dirac, “General Theory of Relativity,” Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 1996.

[17] A. Pich, “The Standard Model of Electroweak Interactions,” IFIC/05-13, FTUV/05-0201, 2005. ArXiv: hep-ph/0502010 v. 1

[1] Itzhak Orion and Michael Laitman, “The Double-Slit Experiment and Wave-Particle Duality: Toward a Novel Quantum Interpretation,” Journal of Modern Physics, 2010, Vol. 1, 90-92. doi:10.4236/jmp.2010.110013

[2] E. Merzbacher, “Quantum Mechanics,” 3rd Edition, Wiley, New York, 1998.

[3] J. S. Townsend, “A Modern Approach to Quantum Mechanics,” University Science, Sausalito, CA, 2000.

[4] R. B. Griffiths, “Consistent Quantum Mechanics,” Cambridge University Press, New York, 2001.

[5] H. Goldstein et al., “Classical Mechanics,” 3rd Edition, Addison-Wesley, San Francisco, 2002.

[6] L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, “Mechanics,” 3rd Edition, Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, 2001.

[7] B. d’Espagnat, “Veiled Reality,” 1st Edition, Addison- Wesley, New York, 1994.

[8] F. Lindner et al., “Attosecond Double-slit Experiment,” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 95, No. 4, 2005.

[9] K. Wang and D. Cao, “Coincidence Subwavelength Interference by a Classical Thermal Light,” Physical Review A, Vol. 70, 2004.

[10] S. P. Walborn et al., “Double-slit Quantum Eraser,” Physical Review A, Vol. 65, 2002. ArXiv: quantph/0106078 v. 1

[11] J. Xiong et al., “Experimental Observation of Classical Sub-Wavelength Interference with Thermal-Like Light,” 2004. ArXiv: quant-ph/0410020 v. 1

[12] G. Brida et al., “A First Experimental Test of De Broglie-Bohm Theory Against Standard Quantum Mechanics,” Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, Vol. 35, 2002. ArXiv: quant-ph/0206196 v. 1, 2002)

[13] A. S. Sanz and F. Borondo, “A Quantum Trajectory Description of Decoherence,” European Physical Journal D, Vol. 44, 2007. ArXiv: quantph/0310096 v. 4, 2004)

[14] M. Bozic et al., “An Asymmetric Double-Slit Interferometer for Small and Large Quantum Particles,” 2003 ArXiv: quant-ph/0305189 v. 1

[15] A. G′ozdz and M. Pietrow, “Projection evolution in quan tum mechanics,” 2003. ArXiv: quantph/0303084 v. 1

[16] P. A. M. Dirac, “General Theory of Relativity,” Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 1996.

[17] A. Pich, “The Standard Model of Electroweak Interactions,” IFIC/05-13, FTUV/05-0201, 2005. ArXiv: hep-ph/0502010 v. 1