• 474D@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    2 days ago

    But then what is the significance of this experiment? Why is it so popular if it’s that simple and why is it usually associated with quantum physics?

    • Farid@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      2 days ago

      If not touched the photon goes through both slits and interacts with itself, which is still super weird. Basically, it’s a wave if not touched, but a particle if touched.

      • Agent641@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        Photons exist at the edge of our dimension, not really a part of it, but skimming the borderlands between dimensions. Like a bug on the surface of a lake, it influences the lake and the atmosphere simultaneously, can be inferred by its effect on the lake, but it cannot be observed (eaten) by a fish without also fully entering the lake dimension. In this borderland state the photon has the theoretical potential to influence many dimensions, but doesn’t belong to any one of them. Measuring, or touching the photon turns that potential into causative certainty where the photon is now part of our dimensions’ event chain, pulling it fully into our dimension to the exclusion of all others and converting it from a probabilistic multidimensional potential into a deterministic unidimensional particle.

        I just made all that up but it sounds pretty good IMO.

      • Gremour@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Which suspiciously reminds optimization. Like computer game with infinite procedural world, where map chunks only generated where player interacts with world, being just formula (algorithm) everywhere else.

        • Farid@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          I have actually seen that video. But my simplification is still correct, except that I should’ve used the word “behaves”. Because for the purposes of how it will behave the simplification shows the effects clearly.