Those of us who have been exposed to quantum physics know that the difference between a particle of matter and a wave of energy breaks down at the quantum level. Thus we have things like the light particle…the photon. In the famous “double-slit experiment†one single photon is fired at a barrier that has 2 slits in it. When the light hits a screen on the other side of the barrier, an interference pattern shows up, indicating that two light waves have merged and distorted each other. The clear implication is that something with a wavelike nature passes simultaneously through both slits and interferes with itself — even though there is only one photon present. (The experiment works with electrons, atoms, and even some molecules too.)
The double-slit experiment is of great interest, because it forces philosophers to reevaluate their ideas about the physical world we experience. In contrast to our way of conceptualizing the world of everyday experience, attempting to describe the motion of a single photon is problematical. If we begin by investigating the motion of single particles through a single slit we can obtain a description of the pattern of photon strikes on a target screen. The pattern on the screen indicates that interference has occurred, yet there is only one photon. This means that the single photon traveled through both slits, or that it was in two places at the same time. How do you explain the trajectory of the single photon to pass simultaneously through 2 separate slits, and generate an interference pattern on the screen? Experience in the world of sub-atomic particles forces us to reconceptualize some of our most commonplace ideas.
A related enigma occurs in the mathematics of quantum particles when equations show that a particle is in 2 places at once. The inconsistency can only be resolved by observing the particle using quantum techniques. Strangely, when the particle is observed at the first place, it is not at the second place. But, should a similar particle be observed in the second place, it is not at the first place. Thus the conscious act of human observance seems to determine the position of the particle.
And how about this? There is a new theory of physics that drops the whole idea of particles and waves. “String theory†holds that “everything but everything†is made up of ultra tiny vibrating strings. I hear String Theory jives with general relativity and examination of the idea is a hot topic in physics today. When the theory is disputed, its always because science currently can not construct an experiment to prove its mathematical predictions. How many times on this page have we lamented that there is no experiment to prove our theories pertaining to God, The Soul, Life after Death etc. Oh, by the way, String Theory requires 11 dimensions. We observe in the 3 spatial dimensions plus a time dimension. What can be in those other 7 dimensions…God?..An afterlife? … A spiritual world existing simultaneously inside and outside the body? Lordy, Lordy, I think maybe we only experience the merest tad of reality. What does evolution hold in store? Will we develop an organ with which to observe the spiritual world somewhere along the line? Thank you for your patience.
The 11 dimentions do not contain God or an afterlife, at least they cirtainly dont have to anymore than the 3 we see. The 11 dimentions are refering things such as folds in time and space. I watched a very insightfull video on it, Im sure if you looked it up it would explain things alot better than I can
Physicists must be growing terrified. They make enormous, boggling theories and then suddenly throw them away. Each time a new one appears, a cult seems to form after it and “god” gets in there somewhere. No wonder for Gallileo - looking through a telescope and describing shapes lead to the view that he made religious assertions to challenge the doctrine. Metaphysics builds up incredibly fast when another science adds an idea to the universe without any idea what it really means. They say: “It could be like this, I don’t know what else.” And we’re drawn to respond: “I’ll paint a picture of what else, it’ll look amazing . . . or terrifying.”
It is just as impossible to prove the existence of other dimensions as it is to prove the existence of God. String theory will remain grounded in the mathematics until someone figures out a way to run experiments to verify it. So right now it is a matter of certain physicists having faith in the idea, due to certain confirmations of General Relativity in the complex string theory math.
The only reason that I mentioned String Theory and the 11 dimensions was to illustrate how little we might know. The universe is very old and very large and very complex. There could be thousands of dimensions for all we know. Mankind has evolved with the bare minimum that he needs to survive in this earthly environment. Thats 5 senses, although some claim a sixth. THink…how much would you know about this world if you couldn’t see, smell, feel, hear, or taste? Not much. Well if we only have 5 senses out of a possible thousand, what can we know? How do we experience the realities that we have not evolved the senses to grasp? We just can’t. One of those dimensions could be a spiritual world. Certainly, all cultures have had some sort of spirituality. It seems to be a need. We might evolve a physical sense to be able to experience the physical nature of the spiritual world in the future…who knows? So God, an afterlife, angels etc are all on the table as possibilities, just like String Theory is. And just like string theory and its math, some really useful things pop out of a faith in these things.
Surely it forces scientists to reevaluate the way they think. A particle cannot be just a particle. Or maybe not even a particle at all.
Think of a packet of energy, as a model somewhat like Comet Holmes as it appears at the moment, intense at the centre and in shells around it, that cannot be divided. Would it not, as it was squeezed through the slit, be ‘pulled in’, or even ‘pushed in’ by the sides of the slit, and then rebound, possibly wobbling in and out, the other side? And might it not thus produce the patterns observed?
Physicists always have to start with faith. They have to have enough faith in a hypothesis to spend the time thinking up how to test it. The hypothesis can never really be proved. But as test after test confirms prediction after prediction, the hypothesis becomes more accepted. Normally, if some experiment shows up different results than what would be expected, the theory is modified to account for the anomaly, like Einstein’s Gravity modified Newton’s Gravity. Quantum theory is a case in point. It says some really strange things like “one thing can be in two places at the same time”. Yet, I have read that 1/3 of the electronic economy of today is in one way or another based on Quantum theory. Hell, if it works it must be truth I guess…even though we don’t totally comprehend it. Same goes for God in IMHO.
The photon, in its particle sense, is much smaller in diameter than either if the slits at any point along their length. The pattern generated on the screen is characteristic of the photon in its wave guise. It is an interference pattern. THink of water waves. If they are going in the same direction and the second one overtakes the first one, we have “constructive interference” where the amplitude of the resulting wave is amplified. If two waves approach each other and collide, we have “destructive interference” and the amplitude of the resulting wave is diminished. It is this type of interference that is observed in the double slit experiment. One Quantum of light, a photon, passes through both slits and its waves display an interference pattern. There’s a picture of the image here; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment