complementarity with single slit diffraction

[DParlevliet]

At any point the detection value will increment in discrete values, rather than a continuum.

Indeed, the discrete increment is a particle property. But "any point" is not discrete, but a continuum, caused by a wave property. Without wave properties "any point" is only the center of the detector.

[swansont]

Indeed, the discrete increment is a particle property. But "any point" is not discrete, but a continuum, caused by a wave property. Without wave properties "any point" is only the center of the detector.

 

But that's position, not amplitude.

[DParlevliet]

 

But that's position, not amplitude.

Yes, and the detctor measures both position and amplitude. So both wave- and particle behaviour.

Of course some of the behaviour, not all, that is impossible.

[swansont]

The detector's position is dependent on where you place the detector. A photodetector measures a signal (current or voltage) proportional to the amplitude. Period. That's all it does. If you want location information you have to do something else.

[DParlevliet]

The detector's position is dependent on where you place the detector. A photodetector measures a signal (current or voltage) proportional to the amplitude. Period. That's all it does. If you want location information you have to do something else.

If you want to measure the amplitude you also have to align and calibrate the detector signal. The same with detector position. Every detector has to be calibrated in different ways, must something be done, before it can be used. Measuring the signal is not all the detector does. It also measures the position, it is designed for that.

 

[swansont]

All I can do now is point out how you were complaining about semantics earlier on, and how it's not science. Clearly, if one is looking for loopholes in explanations, one is going to find them. So if that's the goal, rather than learning the physics, mission accomplished. I'm done.

[DParlevliet]

Yes I argue, but you too. How can one learn physics if physics gives no scientific description? How can one decide then who is wrong or right?

 

Bohr argued that when you measure a photon, you will find values of classical particles and waves. In the classical world a particle can never be a wave, so it is principally impossible to measure at the same time all properties of wave and particle. But I have never seen a citation where Bohr told that you can never measure some at the same time.

 

The single slit measurement output can only be explained with both particles or waves. If this is not right physics, then one must argue based on exact fundamental statements.

[DParlevliet]

Or another question: how can you measure the wave of a photon?