Jump to content

Has the Double Slit experiment ever been conducted in zero gravity?


pittsburghjoe

Recommended Posts

you can certainly go ahead and try it. Experiments are good training aids. Yet consider the coupling constant for gravity is roughly

 

[latex]1.7518*10^{-42} [/latex] I seriously doubt you will see any change in the experiment at zero g than on Earth.

 

However you can calculate a rough estimate via Newtons gravitational formula

 

[latex]f=\frac{GMm}{r^2}[/latex]

 

Just take the mass of the Earth and your radius with the mass of say a proton. You should be able to derive the amount of force g has on that proton.

 

Or better yet run that formula with

 

g= 9.8 m/s^2 and g equals zero. You'll find the difference so miniscule you won't be able to measure it with the mass of a proton. Not between 9.8 m/s^2 and zero g.

proton mass 1.6726219 × 10^-27

Earth mass 5.972 × 10^24 kg

radius of Earth 6,371 km

Gravitational constant 6.674×10−11 N⋅m^2/kg^2

 

I will let you plug those into the above equation.

Edited by Mordred
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe that last post is worth responding to. You obviously aren't interested in understanding what a waveform means in QM.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function

 

here is waveform collapse

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function_collapse

 

Now are you interested in learning how Physics treats superposition and wavefunction collapse or are you more interested in making baseless assertions?

Edited by Mordred
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever you feel, thread won't go far in this direction. I'm not here to cater to misconceptions and lack of understanding of physics.

 

I'm here to help people understand physics and lose their misconceptions.

Edited by Mordred
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My goal it to figure out what the hell is going on during the double slit experiment. I can't figure out why you guys have a problem with a particle being a wave OR a particle at a given moment. The slit experiment shows us that a particle changes it's path dependent on which state it is in, why is this not good enough for you?

Edited by pittsburghjoe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not good enough to determine which polarity path it takes. That is determined by the statistical average of the wavefunction. Aka Superposition. What kind of questions are we asking?

 

Which part of the wave strikes the slits to get interferance?

what is the percentage chance the particle is at that interferance position?

What spin position was that particle in corresponding to the slits and chosen path?

How many possible paths for each spin values?

 

Which quantum number wavefunctions are involved?

 

 

That's the details behind superposition those and other questions involved

My goal it to figure out what the hell is going on during the double slit experiment. I can't figure out why you guys have a problem with a particle being a wave OR a particle at a given moment. The slit experiment shows us that a particle changes it's path dependent on which state it is in, why is this not good enough for you?

A particle always has momentum its position and momentum cannot be measured simultaneously with certainty. See Heisenburg uncertainty principle

 

This is extremely well tested and we can only reduce the uncertainty by weak interference.

 

Thats why we use probability statistics (Superposition)

Edited by Mordred
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is pointless. I'm not wasting my time on someone who has no interest in learning. Yet doesn't even understand the subject he is arguing against.

Quantum Polarity is a cop-out.

 

You sound like someone that has convinced themselves of a lie. I get that it is necessary to pass the QM tests at school, but I want to bring this back down to reality.

It was good enough to predict the wavefunctions of a gravity wave long before we detected one. I'll stick to those lies as they make accurate predictions. As well as used in many everyday real life applications. Edited by Mordred
Link to comment
Share on other sites

!

Moderator Note

 

Whilst this thread may have started with an honest question it is descended into an argument from ignorance and incredulity. Any more of that style of argument and we will lock the thread.

 

And btw, if the OP states that the reason our experts don't understand or agree with the proposition is because they are blinkered or unwilling to learn then I will deem it insulting and against Rule 1 "Be Civil" - I have had it with this post-factual phenomenon of posters coming to this site and slagging off our experts because the university education of our staff does not tally with what people reckon should be the case.

 

Do not respond to this moderation

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quantum Polarity is a cop-out.

 

You sound like someone that has convinced themselves of a lie. I get that it is necessary to pass the QM tests at school, but I want to bring this back down to reality.

You don't what you don't know. I don't know either but I do know when I don't..

 

Why is it that people wouldn't dream of questioning the diagnostic ability or skill of of a plumber, electrician et al but will happily ride roughshod over scientists with decades of learning?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My goal it to figure out what the hell is going on during the double slit experiment.

Then maybe you should start from buying setup in the first place?

Lasers 100 mW red,green,blue. Cost $12 each.

Double slit for photons cost $7.

Spend $43 and replicate experiment by yourself.

 

I can't figure out why you guys have a problem with a particle being a wave OR a particle at a given moment. The slit experiment shows us that a particle changes it's path dependent on which state it is in, why is this not good enough for you?

Double slit experiment with photons, interference pattern changes when different energy photons are used (classic wavelength=hc/E), therefor I said to buy 3 lasers red,green,blue, to compare differences.

 

Double slit experiment with electrons, interference pattern changes when different kinetic energy of particle is used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much helium would be required to send this up to space?

What do you mean by space? The atmosphere doesn't just end. Gravity certainly doesn't just end.

 

The difference between what you're saying and what a scientist would do is that the scientist would calculate how much gravity would need to vary by to observe a measurable difference, not just guessing.

 

You know the iss isn't in zero g right? Things float because they're in free fall with the container (space station).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much helium would be required to send this up to space?

Ballon can reach only certain altitude and that depends on density of gas, and density of atmosphere at that altitude, around ballon.

When pressure is 101325 Pa, temperature is T=273.15 K, there is 0.04464 mol/L (ideal gas law).

Multiply it by molar mass of gas, and you have density of gas.

f.e. Hydrogen H2 has molar mass 2.016 g/mol

0.04464 * 2.016 = 0.08999424 g/L density of Hydrogen gas

Helium He has molar mass 4.0026 g/mol

0.04464 * 4.0026 = 0.178676064 g/L density of Helium gas

Ballon has mass of gas inside it, plus mass of device, so overall density will be higher than above one mentioned.

Use some calculator (Google "density altitude calculator") to learn what density of atmosphere is at certain altitude and confront it with above ballon density.

Device lighter than air can't go further altitude were they both are equal.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point of the experiment is to see if gravity has anything to do with a particle when in it's wave form (unmeasured). Is true zero g required, good question. Umm, free falling would be worth a shot if zero g is going to be problematic.


Ballon can reach only certain altitude and that depends on density of gas, and density of atmosphere at that altitude, around ballon.
When pressure is 101325 Pa, temperature is T=273.15 K, there is 0.04464 mol/L (ideal gas law).
Multiply it by molar mass of gas, and you have density of gas.
f.e. Hydrogen H2 has molar mass 2.016 g/mol
0.04464 * 2.016 = 0.08999424 g/L density of Hydrogen gas
Helium He has molar mass 4.0026 g/mol
0.04464 * 4.0026 = 0.178676064 g/L density of Helium gas
Ballon has mass of gas inside it, plus mass of device, so overall density will be higher than above one mentioned.
Use some calculator (Google "density altitude calculator") to learn what density of atmosphere is at certain altitude and confront it with above ballon density.

Device lighter than air can't go further altitude were they both are equal.

 

 

hmm, can I get into trouble with the government for launching something like this?

If the balloon carried a rocket, could it launch the experiment further up into space after the balloon became equalized?

Edited by pittsburghjoe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point of the experiment is to see if gravity has anything to do with a particle when in it's wave form (unmeasured). Is true zero g required, good question. Umm, free falling would be worth a shot if zero g is going to be problematic.

 

"Wave form" does not mean unmeasured.

 

There are lots of experiments that have been done in freefall. In space (orbit), vomit-comet style planes, and drop towers. The distinction there is there was some propsed reason for the experiment, rather than just not understanding physics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hmm, can I get into trouble with the government for launching something like this?

Depends were you are.

 

That's the last thing you should bother in this experiment..

 

If the balloon carried a rocket, could it launch the experiment further up into space after the balloon became equalized?

Ballon that carry rocket would have to be giant.

Hindenburg had 245 meters.

And could carry a few tons of payload.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry if it's already been mentioned, but would a double-slit experiment performed on Earth, but 90 degrees rotated from "usual" satisfy?

 

i.e. the slits are normally arranged "||", with the interference patterns seen along a strip that ranges left-and-right; instead, arrange the entire experiment so that the slits are horizontal, and the interference patterns are seen along a strip that ranges up-and-down.

 

Would you expect a different result?

 

Or - is there a claim that gravity causes "an effect", but that direction isn't involved?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry if it's already been mentioned, but would a double-slit experiment performed on Earth, but 90 degrees rotated from "usual" satisfy?i.e. the slits are normally arranged "||", with the interference patterns seen along a strip that ranges left-and-right; instead, arrange the entire experiment so that the slits are horizontal, and the interference patterns are seen along a strip that ranges up-and-down.Would you expect a different result?Or - is there a claim that gravity causes "an effect", but that direction isn't involved?

That's one of the stuations I was referring to. It can matter in an interferometer, but only if your experiment is designed to be very sensitive. The two paths have a different amount of energy, which will cause a fringe shift, but you need to be sensitive to effects of order mgh. An atom interferometer, for example.

 

But in a typical double-slit experiment, the effect is negligible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry if it's already been mentioned, but would a double-slit experiment performed on Earth, but 90 degrees rotated from "usual" satisfy?

 

i.e. the slits are normally arranged "||", with the interference patterns seen along a strip that ranges left-and-right; instead, arrange the entire experiment so that the slits are horizontal, and the interference patterns are seen along a strip that ranges up-and-down.

 

Would you expect a different result?

 

Or - is there a claim that gravity causes "an effect", but that direction isn't involved?

Lovely lateral thinking.

 

We might as well do one pointing straight up as well - although as SwansonT mentioned that we have already commpared switching from vertical to horizontal slits I guess we have already tried slits perpendicular to the earth's surface

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm reading though a free fall paper now http://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/research-centres-and-groups/the-centre-for-cold-matter/public/Florian-Baumg%C3%A4rtner-(2011).pdf


"Atom interferometry in free fall demonstrates fundamental quantum physics and a new level of technology readiness for future experiments in space."

 

https://physics.aps.org/articles/v6/23

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.