A solution for the paradox of the double-slit experiment
Abstract
We argue that the double-slit experiment can be understood much better by considering it as an experiment whereby one uses electrons to study the set-up rather than an experiment whereby we use a set-up to study the behaviour of electrons. We also show how the concept of undecidability can be used in an intuitive way to make sense of the double-slit experiment and the quantum rules for calculating coherent and incoherent probabilities. We meet here a situation where the electrons always behave in a fully deterministic way (following Einstein's conception of reality), while the detailed design of the set-up may render the question about the way they move through the set-up experimentally undecidable (which follows more Bohr's conception of reality). We show that the expression 1 + 2 for the wave function of the double-slit experiment is numerically correct, but logically flawed. It has to be replaced in the interference region by the logically correct expression '1 + '2, which has the same numerical value as 1 + 2, such that '1 + '2 = 1 + 2, but with '1 = 1 +22 \,e π4 ≠ 1 and '2 = 1 +22\,e- π4≠ 2. Here '1 and '2 are the correct contributions from the slits to the total wave function '1 + '2. We have then p = |'1 + '2|2 = |'1|2 + |'2|2 = p1+p2 such that the paradox that quantum mechanics (QM) would not follow the traditional rules of probability calculus disappears.
Turn this paper into a lesson
ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.