Introduction
This idea was born from the idea of reviewing the double-slit experiment, initially performed by Thomas Young in 1801 and subsequently reproduced on countless occasions, an experiment that has been fundamental to the development of Quantum Theory.
This article is based on the theoretical foundation of Spatial Field Theory, an idea I developed and which is publicly available at the following link: Spatial Field Theory. It expresses alternative interpretations based on the particular spin and its field to explain various phenomena in classical and contemporary physics that, from my point of view, still retain a certain magical aura within the universe of science. For example, it describes how the magnetic field in an electric current originates from the aligned spatial positioning of the electrons and the superposition of all their fields, dismantling the concept of relativistic velocities currently used to offer this justification. Other aspects that are very important for this analysis can also be found, such as the influence of the particular spin and its field on the origin, nature, and direction of the force.
An equally important reason why I'm writing this article now is based on an experience I had a little over a year ago, when a certain well-known individual showed some interest in this idea. After a period of silence, I now know that he undertook private research on his own, accompanied by a large investment. This theory, from the outset, I have made public, cooperative, and open, thinking more about the benefits that can come from having a better understanding of the fields and their control. This idea could be incredibly important for the space race, life in space, and medical applications currently being carried out on the ISS could be reproduced on Earth by controlling the "g" field from the "e" and "m" fields. If this were the case, it would be irresponsible not to pay enough attention to it, knowing that it could directly affect the future of humanity.
To start and make things easier, I asked GhatGPT (in italics) to give me a brief summary of the double-slit experiment. This would provide me with a text to work from, to go through its evolution step by step, and to give some of the current interpretations a new perspective so that they seem less fantastical and more in line with down-to-earth scientific thinking.
The account I received from ChatGPT is as follows:
Step-by-Step Experiment:
The Experiment Setup
Imagine you have a device that emits light or electrons, which is directed toward a screen with two narrow slits, placed very close to each other. Behind these slits and at a certain distance, there is a detection screen that can record where the light or electron hits.
1. Step 1: The Light Source
When you turn on the laser, it emits a coherent beam of light, which means that the light waves have a constant phase and are very similar to each other. So far, the experiment is very clear: a laser emits a light wave containing photons and, therefore, will behave as such. But will the same thing happen when we use an electron gun? We would expect it to, since the acceleration and vibration of the electron also create an electromagnetic wave, and just like with a light beam, the electron will be nested within the amplitude of the wave and they will propagate together through space. To understand the concept of nesting, I always compare it to ourselves, traveling at dizzying speeds through space without being aware of it for the simple reason that our "g" field is nested within the "G" field of the system.
The following images show the differences between the interference derived from diffraction and laser linearity when it passes through a single slit and the interference produced by the aforementioned diffraction when it passes through two slits.
Interference image at a single slit.
Interference image at a double slit.
2. Step 2: The Slits
Upon reaching the slits, the light splits into two paths: one part passes through the left slit and the other through the right slit. This is where the magic begins.
For now, what's happening is what we would expect.
3. Step 3: Interference
As the light waves emerge from the slits, they overlap. Why does this happen? The explanation lies in the wave nature of light. When light waves pass through the two slits, they overlap and combine when they are in phase. In some places, the crests of the waves add up, creating bright areas, while in other places, a crest meets a trough, canceling each other out and creating dark areas. I think it might help if you think of waves like ripples in water: when two waves meet, they can reinforce each other (constructive interference) or cancel each other out (destructive interference). This creates a pattern of bright and dark bands on the screen behind the slits, called an interference pattern.
### Initial Observations
When the experiment is performed with continuous light, the interference pattern forms quickly, showing that light behaves like a wave. This result was surprising for the time, as it challenged the classical view of light as particles (photons) moving in straight lines.
### The Particle Surprise
Now, here's where the experiment becomes even more intriguing. If instead of light, you fire electrons (which are particles) one by one toward the slits, the result is the same. At first, you might think that each electron would pass through one slit or the other, creating two shadows on the screen. However, as the electron impacts accumulate, an interference pattern also forms.
I've already mentioned that when we accelerate electrons, we also create a wave, even if it's just a single electron. Therefore, there will be an electromagnetic wave that will serve as a medium for the electron as it propagates through space. This wave can be divided as it passes through the double slit, subsequently creating the constructive and destructive interference that will determine the electron's travel until it hits the screen. You'll see that I'm choosing words to avoid confusion that might distort the idea, such as "travel," which is not the same as "path," even though the two end up in the same place.
While waves always propagate through space, particles can move in two different ways: either nested within the wave, propagating as if they were moving, just as we move through the universe at dizzying speeds without any perception, nested within the "g" field of the Earth, System,... or traveling from one point to another along an apparently linear trajectory. I say apparently because it will depend, on the one hand, on the resistance to change offered by its spin mass, and, on the other, on the interactions of its particular field, also in spin, with the average field through which it travels.
And now let's continue, and you'll immediately see the importance of such a difference...
The fact that the wave as a medium carries out constructive and/or destructive interferences after being split in two by passing through the double slit, the different variations that will occur in the wave's amplitude as it propagates as a result of such interferences, will cause the electron, which remains nested and in equilibrium within the wave, to change its position within the wave as a result of the change in the magnetic amplitude of the medium, choosing its movement randomly and fortuitously due to the interferences produced within the medium. This is very similar to the path taken by the balls in Francis Galton's machine. In fact, the final result is exactly the same, so we could explain it in the same way:
"It is from the physical limits we impose at the outset with the bifurcation of the double slit and the resulting interferences that a binomial distribution is produced in the path of the electrons that will approach the normal distribution, a result that is clearly evident in the interference pattern."
So I don't consider it unreasonable to consider that the electron follows the binomial path derived from the interference between waves in a similarly probabilistic manner. This argument helps me demystify the next step a bit, while still acknowledging the correctness of considering it as a probability wave, allowing me to downplay the idea of quantum superposition as a simple game of chance.
*I have always thought it a very curious fact that the interference pattern is a reflected and amplified image of the wave's amplitude, just as we imagine it when we try to represent it with an image.
1. Step 4: Quantum Behavior
This suggests that each electron behaves like a probability wave rather than a specific particle, passing through both slits simultaneously, interfering with itself. It's as if each electron "knows" there are two paths and takes both at the same time. This gave rise to the idea of wave-particle duality. According to this idea, subatomic particles can behave as both waves and particles, depending on how they are observed. An electron, for example, can exhibit wave properties or particle properties, depending on how it is measured.
We have already seen that the electron interacts with the wave's magnetic field when it is nested within it, accommodated in its amplitude as if resting in equilibrium, so it is natural to think that it behaves like a wave when it propagates together within it.
### Observation Changes Everything: The Actor-Observer Effect
The most puzzling part of the experiment occurs when you try to observe which slit each electron passes through. If you place a detector at one of the slits to see which path the electron takes, the interference pattern disappears. Instead, you get two shadows, as if the electrons were acting like classical particles. This raises profound questions about the role of the observer in quantum mechanics.
If you know how a detector works, you'll agree with me that it's essential to create an electric field and measure its oscillations using instruments if we intend to detect the passage of an electron through the slit, something we can only do through interaction with its field. Unfortunately, this interference in the experiment will completely corrupt it, and it does so in the following way: like Faraday's work in 1845, we are subjecting the electron to the attraction of a magnetic field that remains perpendicular to the trajectory, which, although it does not interact with the wave, does interact with the electron's field. In other words, we are changing the spatial position of the electron that remained nested within the wave through the application of the invasive magnetic field. The result is an alignment of the electron with the trajectory, as observed in the "gif," a slight change in its speed that will dephase it and disconnect it from the initial wave, thus losing its nesting. From this point on, the spin and resistance to change will do their work; the electron will travel along a practically linear trajectory, absent interference, to the goal, similar to the path it describes inside a cathode ray tube, or old televisions, behaving like a particle with mass that it is. To reinforce this idea, I think of the example of the Aurora Borealis, where exactly the same thing happens: the Earth's magnetic field determines the electron's trajectory, disconnecting it from the original wave of the sun with which it travels.
Before continuing, I'd like to know what our electron's resistance to change should be.
Just as an electron has spin, its field also rotates, and from this displacement, the forces we recognize in it originate. The simple fact that an axis exists means that all the forces that arise will be in accordance with it, so the field, from the perspective of the resulting forces, will be polarized. It has a strong intensity at the equator that decreases as we approach the poles.
Thus, we can conclude that it is the Faraday effect that causes the electron to detach itself from the wave and begin its isolated journey as a particle.
### Philosophical Implications
The double-slit experiment is not only a physical phenomenon; it also has profound philosophical implications. It leads us to question the nature of reality and how observation affects what we measure. Does reality exist independently of our observation, or does observation determine the outcome?
No comments.....
### ChatGPT Conclusion
In short, the double-slit experiment is a milestone in physics that reveals the wave-particle duality of light.
To date...
Note:
With this article, my intention is not to say that quantum physics is wrong, as it is a true success, a breakthrough in the physics of probability. I only intend to change some aspects of the interpretation of the experiment because I believe such changes could be more than interesting. Therefore, I encourage you to repeat it and try to see it from my point of view, or, if applicable, from a better perspective.
Credits:
Experiment on polarized fields.
Although the polarization of the field has no apparent impact on the double-slit experiment, the application of polarized filters has made me realize some issues that I thought were important to share after the article, due to the curiosity aroused in the observer by certain phenomena that sometimes appear somewhat magical on the Internet.
But before continuing with the previous double-slit experiment, I polarized the wave using polarizing filters to see what would happen. To reduce the margin of error, I selected the polarity of the filters to be vertical and horizontal, as well as the polarity of the laser, since after the beam is split in two as it passes through the double slit, the resulting beams behave as if they were polarized. Then, first, I checked the interference pattern of the beam without any filter, then passing it through only one polar filter, the right one, then through the other, and finally each beam from the slit through each of the filters. Finally, I compared to observe how polarization affects the interference pattern in each case. Although this is nothing new, considering how polarization and phase shift are currently used for viewing 3D movies, it was pleasant to observe how when we break the interference, the pattern also blurs, although not as completely as I would have expected if the experiment hadn't been so precarious.
The curiosity I want to share with you was sparked by the seemingly magical experiment of inserting a new polarized filter between two filters that prevent propagation because they are completely crossed.
*Don't think I'm insensitive to magic, I just love to know the whys and wherefores of things.
I realized that, in addition to the change in amplitude when the lenses weren't completely perpendicular, what the second lens was doing was defining a new polarized plane independent of its predecessor. This is quite logical, of course. However, I didn't think the disconnection from the previous plane would be complete. I had the impression that the previous lenses would veto the angle that had previously been restricted. I was completely wrong.
We must keep in mind that in a polarized filter, north and south are exactly the same. That is, when speaking of planes, there is only vertical and horizontal, although I will continue to maintain the idea of north and south based on inherited knowledge.
The following GIF shows how the rotation of the second filter conditions the passage of light by 90 degrees when it is polarized by the first, changing the plane of the light during the rotation, a plane that is essential for the influence of the third.
The following compilation highlights the four moments where there is no final flow, either because the angle differential between the first and second filters is 90 degrees or because the angle between the second and third filters is also within a 90-degree differential.
And in the following, the four intermediate moments where outflow is possible because the angle between the first and second filters and between the second and third filters are, at various times, less than 90 degrees.
This becomes clearer when we align many more polarized filters. We might think that the interaction angle would be restricted from 90 to 60 or 45 degrees, depending on the number of filters. Or that it would be inherited so that if we cross filters later with respect to other previous filters, the beam would be restricted because that angle was previously prohibited. But no, each filter defines a new plane for the outgoing polarized light that is completely independent of all previous filters, except for the first one that initially polarized the light.
In the following video you can see how the initial angle is not inherited in a multiple alignment of filters, that is, although there are multiple filters that cross each other repeatedly coinciding in the path, the fact of having intermediate filters that define a new polar plane independently of their predecessors makes the laser manage to pass through all the filters and continue with its path, although yes, with the loss of amplitude that the exposure to so many filters entails.
Catalan version
Spanish version
English version
