coja to Science [email protected] • 1 year agoDouble-slitlemmy.mlimagemessage-square126fedilinkarrow-up11.51Karrow-down139
arrow-up11.47Karrow-down1imageDouble-slitlemmy.mlcoja to Science [email protected] • 1 year agomessage-square126fedilink
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish1•1 year agoWhat if u look at only one of the slits?
minus-square@GabulinkEnglish3•1 year agoSame deal, you’re still measuring and can still determine which photons passed through which slit.
minus-square@fruitSnackSupremelinkEnglish2•1 year agoBut then you potentially wouldn’t be interacting with all the photons right?
minus-square@GabulinkEnglish1•1 year agoYou are, just not in an intuitive way. Because you’d know the rate of emission of your light source, the information of when a photon passes slit-2 would still “tag” them (whatever photon didn’t pass slit-1 must have passed slit-2).
What if u look at only one of the slits?
Same deal, you’re still measuring and can still determine which photons passed through which slit.
But then you potentially wouldn’t be interacting with all the photons right?
You are, just not in an intuitive way. Because you’d know the rate of emission of your light source, the information of when a photon passes slit-2 would still “tag” them (whatever photon didn’t pass slit-1 must have passed slit-2).