• Neato@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Exactly. The issue is that you can’t detect photons without interacting with them. So it isn’t observation like so many people think. It’s that if you interact with subatomic particles you change their state.

    • ALostInquirer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The issue is that you can’t detect photons without interacting with them.

      Can’t…So far, right? Like there hasn’t been a method developed to somehow detect indirectly without interaction? I don’t know enough about this to know how one might go about that, but I imagine those that know more might love to given whatever knowledge may be gained.

      • Neato@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No. Can’t. The only interaction sensors have is with particles. Photons usually. All things give off light but then measuring light itself, measuring is destructive.

      • Klear@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Detecting” equals “interaction” in this context. You can’t detect them without detecting them.

        • ALostInquirer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Although, given some further thought, isn’t the double-slit experiment being discussed here sort of demonstrative of a “detection” without detection, i.e. the wave pattern vs. the particle pattern emerging after “detection/measurement/interaction”? Or am I misunderstanding it?

          Is there another way they operate/appear outside of the wave-particle that eludes observation?