Thread #16959846
File: 1000_F_493218732_0DKYAhboySeO0RJOZaYjQIL2X2F2quad.jpg (188.9 KB)
188.9 KB JPG
10 RepliesView Thread
>>
File: 1759703587383828.png (409.6 KB)
409.6 KB PNG
dunno
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
File: 1748095315217054.jpg (287.3 KB)
287.3 KB JPG
>>16959846
That is a fake experiment. There is no such thing as a "photon detector" in such an experiment. It is almost impossible to detect a photon without destroying it. Your ideas about physics are retarded slop from the internet that has little to do with physics.
To answer your question, there is no conclusive evidence or theory either way. As far as quantum physics goes, god may or may not play dice. See
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_quantum_mechanics
Is it confusing? Yes.
>>
>>16959909
You have a detector that doesn't destroy the photon though. Put a photon detector in one slit. If the photon doesn't hit the detector but makes a dot on the screen, it must've gone through the other slit. The interference pattern disappears but the detector never interacted with the photons that hit the screen.
>>
>>16960013
>You have a detector that doesn't destroy the photon though.
No, you don't. Such a detector doesn't exist. The experiment has never be done with photons, by which I mean the double-slit experiment where one slit is "observed", not simply covered. It has be done with electrons, more or less.