Through Two Doors at Once: The Elegant Experiment That Captures the Enigma of Our Quantum Reality by Anil Ananthaswamy (PDF)

Description

One of Smithsonian’s Favorite Books of 2018One of Forbes’s 2018 Best Books About Astronomy, Physics and MathematicsOne of Kirkus’s Best Books of 2018 The intellectual adventure story of the “double-slit” experiment, showing how a sunbeam split into two paths first challenged our understanding of light and then the nature of reality itself–and continues to almost 200 years later.Many of science’s greatest minds have grappled with the simple yet elusive “double-slit” experiment. Thomas Young devised it in the early 1800s to show that light behaves like a wave, and in doing so opposed Isaac Newton. Nearly a century later, Albert Einstein showed that light comes in quanta, or particles, and the experiment became key to a fierce debate between Einstein and Niels Bohr over the nature of reality. Richard Feynman held that the double slit embodies the central mystery of the quantum world. Decade after decade, hypothesis after hypothesis, scientists have returned to this ingenious experiment to help them answer deeper and deeper questions about the fabric of the universe.How can a single particle behave both like a particle and a wave? Does a particle exist before we look at it, or does the very act of looking create reality? Are there hidden aspects to reality missing from the orthodox view of quantum physics? Is there a place where the quantum world ends and the familiar classical world of our daily lives begins, and if so, can we find it? And if there’s no such place, then does the universe split into two each time a particle goes through the double slit?With his extraordinarily gifted eloquence, Anil Ananthaswamy travels around the world and through history, down to the smallest scales of physical reality we have yet fathomed. Through Two Doors at Once is the most fantastic voyage you can take.

User’s Reviews

Editorial Reviews: Review Praise for Through Two Doors at Once“Through Two Doors at Once is a challenging and rewarding survey of how scientists…are grappling with nature’s deepest, strangest secrets.”–Wall Street Journal“A fascinating tour through the cutting-edge physics the experiment keeps on spawning.” –Scientific American”“In this book, science writer Anil Ananthaswamy gives an absolutely mind-boggling tour of how quantum physicists try to explain this “reality” that one of the most powerful scientific models of our era.”–Smithsonian “Through Two Doors at Once offers beginners the tools they need to seriously engage with the philosophical questions that likely drew them to quantum mechanics.”–Science“At a time when popular physics writing so valorizes theory, a quietly welcome strength of Ananthaswamy’s book is how much human construction comes into focus here. This is not “nature” showing us, but us pressing “nature” for answers to our increasingly obsessional questions.” –Margaret Wertheim, The Washington Post”Ananthaswamy’s book is simply an outstanding exploration of the double slit experiment and what makes it so weird.”–Forbes”A thrilling survey of the most famous, enduring, and enigmatic experiment in the history of science.”–Kirkus, starred review”Ananthaswamy deftly describes the science and history of a simple experiment that perplexes physicists to this day.”–Symmetry, Physics Books of 2018“Following up 2015’s acclaimed The Man Who Wasn’t There, Ananthaswamy treats a 19th-century light experiment as a sprawling intellectual adventure story….This accessible, illuminating book shows that no matter how sophisticated the lab setup, the double-slit experiment still challenges physicists.”–Publisher’s Weekly, Top 10 Science Books for Fall 2018″An excellent and comprehensive exploration of notable double-slit-like experiments…. A fascinating and readable exploration of quantum mechanics that is a particularly wonderful book for nonspecialists, hobbyists and students of science — you may not be able to put this captivating book down until you’ve finished it.”–Forbes“An engaging and accessible history of a fascinating and baffling experiment that remains inconclusive to this day. Recommended for those interested in the subject or anyone wishing to delve further into the double-slit experiment.”–Library Journal“Through Two Doors at Once is a fascinating read and a must for anyone who would like to find out the latest experimental advances made in this most fundamental of quantum experiments.”–Physics World“Ananthaswamy cleverly comes at quantum physics from a different direction…An excellent addition to the ‘Quantum physics for the rest of us’ shelf.”–Brian Clegg, author of Are Numbers Real? and The Quantum Age“Wondrous book. If I were boarding the Trans-Siberian Railway in Moscow, Anil Ananthaswamy is the companion I’d want in the Lounge car. I would buy him a very good Scotch, say ‘Tell me about quantum physics and the scientists who created it,’ and then I’d sit back contentedly for the seven days to Vladivostok, and listen.”–David Quammen, award-winning author of The Song of the Dodoand (forthcoming) The Tangled Tree “Upon opening his two quantum doors, Anil Ananthaswamy invites us into the bizarre and wacky world of nature on the smallest of scales. An engaging raconteur, he tells us a story that is confounding, disturbing, and yet eminently fascinating. Ananthaswamy serves as the perfect tour guide to physics’ wild side by closely examining one of its most famous experiments.”–Marcia Bartusiak, award-winning author of Einstein’s Unfinished Symphony and Dispatches from Planet 3″Quantum mechanics asks us to believe a number of bizarre things about the nature of reality. But these demands don’t arise out of thin air; they are forced on us by experiments. Anil Ananthaswamy has provided a lively introduction to the most paradigmatic of these: the (in)famous double-slit experiment.” –Sean Carroll, author of The Big Picture “The double-slit experiment is among the most important experiments ever conducted, both scientifically and historically. In this brisk and enjoyable book, Anil Ananthaswamy gives the double-slit the biography it has long deserved. Anyone interested in the true nature of our quantum world should read this book.”–Adam Becker, Ph.D., author of What Is Real? “All the strangeness of the quantum world is revealed as Ananthaswamy skillfully weaves an almost magical tale out of who, what, when, where and the elusive why surrounding modern versions of an experiment first performed over two hundred years ago. A must read for all those interested in the nature of reality.”–Manjit Kumar, author of Quantum”Like quantum particles encountering the fabled double slit, physicists have traveled many different paths in trying to parse the beguiling implications of quantum theory. Through Two Doors at Once is a marvelous guide to the leading ideas – and the stakes – in that century-long quest.”–David Kaiser, author of How the Hippies Saved Physics”The first time I saw the double-slit experiment, I thought it was a trick. Even now that I know it’s real, it still seems like magic. In his new book, Anil Ananthaswamy brings alive the magic of quantum mechanics.”–Sabine Hossenfelder, physicist and author of Lost in Math”For a lover of physics and mathematics, there could not have been a better book to explain the complexities of quantum mechanics.” –The Hindustan Times About the Author Anil Ananthaswamy is an award-winning journalist and former staff writer and deputy news editor for the London-based New Scientist magazine. He has been a guest editor for the science writing program at the University of California, Santa Cruz, and organizes and teaches an annual science journalism workshop at the National Centre for Biological Sciences in Bengaluru, India. He is a freelance feature editor for the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science’s Front Matter. He contributes regularly to the New Scientist, and has also written for Nature, National Geographic News, Discover, Nautilus, Matter, The Wall Street Journal and the UK’s Literary Review. His first book, The Edge of Physics, was voted book of the year in 2010 by Physics World, and his second book, The Man Who Wasn’t There, won a Nautilus Book Award in 2015 and was long-listed for the 2016 Pen/E. O. Wilson Literary Science Writing Award. Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved. 1 THE CASE OF THE EXPERIMENT WITH TWO HOLES Richard Feynman Explains the Central Mystery There is nothing more surreal, nothing more abstract than reality. -Giorgio Morandi Richard Feynman was still a year away from winning his Nobel Prize. And two decades away from publishing an endearing autobiographical book that introduced him to non-physicists as a straight-talking scientist interested in everything from cracking safes to playing drums. But in November 1964, to students at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, he was already a star and they received him as such. Feynman came to deliver a series of lectures. Strains of “Far above Cayuga’s Waters” rang out from the Cornell Chimes. The provost introduced Feynman as an instructor and physicist par excellence, but also, of course, as an accomplished bongo drummer. Feynman strode onto the stage to the kind of applause reserved for performing artists, and opened his lecture with this observation: “It’s odd, but in the infrequent occasions when I have been called upon in a formal place to play the bongo drums, the introducer never seems to find it necessary to mention that I also do theoretical physics.” By his sixth lecture, Feynman dispensed with any preamble, even a token “Hello” to the clapping students, and jumped straight into how our intuition, which is suited to dealing with everyday things that we can see and hear and touch, fails when it comes to understanding nature at very small scales. And often, he said, it’s experiments that challenge our intuitive view of the world. “Then we see unexpected things,” said Feynman. “We see things that are very far from what we could have imagined. And so our imagination is stretched to the utmost-not, as in fiction, to imagine things which aren’t really there. But our imagination is stretched to the utmost just to comprehend those things which are there. And it’s this kind of a situation that I want to talk about.” The lecture was about quantum mechanics, the physics of the very small things; in particular, it was about the nature of light and subatomic bits of matter such as electrons. In other words, it was about the nature of reality. Do light and electrons show wavelike behavior (like water does)? Or do they act like particles (like grains of sand do)? Turns out that saying yes or no would be both correct and incorrect. Any attempt to visualize the behavior of the microscopic, subatomic entities makes a mockery of our intuition. “They behave in their own inimitable way,” said Feynman. “Which, technically, could be called the ‘quantum-mechanical’ way. They behave in a way that is like nothing that you have ever seen before. Your experience with things that you have seen before is inadequate-is incomplete. The behavior of things on a very tiny scale is simply different. They do not behave just like particles. They do not behave just like waves.” But at least light and electrons behave in “exactly the same” way, said Feynman. “That is, they’re both screwy.” Feynman cautioned the audience that the lecture was going to be difficult because it would challenge their widely held views about how nature works: “But the difficulty, really, is psychological and exists in the perpetual torment that results from your saying to yourself ‘But how can it be like that?’ Which really is a reflection of an uncontrolled, but I say utterly vain, desire to see it in terms of some analogy with something familiar. I will not describe it in terms of an analogy with something familiar. I’ll simply describe it.” And so, to make his point over the course of an hour of spellbinding oratory, Feynman focused on the “one experiment which has been designed to contain all of the mystery of quantum mechanics, to put you up against the paradoxes and mysteries and peculiarities of nature.” It was the double-slit experiment. It’s difficult to imagine a simpler experiment-or, as we’ll discover over the course of this book, one more confounding. We start with a source of light. Place in front of the source a sheet of opaque material with two narrow, closely spaced slits or openings. This creates two paths for the light to go through. On the other side of the opaque sheet is a screen. What would you expect to see on the screen? The answer, at least in the context of the world we are familiar with, depends on what one thinks is the nature of light. In the late seventeenth century and all of the eighteenth century, Isaac Newton’s ideas dominated our view of light. He argued that light was made of tiny particles, or “corpuscles,” as he called them. Newton’s “corpuscular theory of light” was partly formulated to explain why light, unlike sound, cannot bend around corners. Light must be made of particles, Newton argued, since particles don’t curve or bend in the absence of external forces. In his lecture, when Feynman analyzed the double-slit experiment, he first considered the case of a source firing particles at the two slits. To accentuate the particle nature of the source, he urged the audience to imagine that instead of subatomic particles (of which electrons and particles of light would be examples), we were to fire bullets from a gun-which “come in lumps.” To avoid too much violent imagery (what with bombs in the prologue, and a thought experiment with gunpowder to come), let’s imagine a source that spews particles of sand rather than bullets; we know that sand comes in lumps, though the lumps are much, much smaller than bullets. First, let’s do the experiment with either the left slit or the right slit closed. Let’s take it that the source is firing grains of sand at high enough speeds that they have straight trajectories. When we do this, the grains of sand that get through the slits mostly hit the region of the screen directly behind the open slit, with the numbers tapering off on either side. The higher the height of the graph, the more the number of grains of sand reaching that location on the screen. Now, what should we see if both slits are open? As expected, each grain of sand passes through one or the other opening and reaches the other side. The distribution of the grains of sand on the far screen is simply the sum of what goes through each slit. It’s a demonstration of the intuitive and sensible behavior of the non-quantum world of everyday experience, the classical world described so well by Newton’s laws of motion. To be convinced that this is indeed what happens with particles of sand, let’s orient the device such that the sand is now falling down onto the barrier with two slits. Our intuition clearly tells us that two mounds should form beneath the two openings. Turning the experiment back to its original position, let’s dispense with the sand and consider a source that’s emitting light, and assume that light’s made of Newtonian corpuscles. Informed by our experiment with sand particles, we’d expect to see two strips of light on the screen, one behind the right slit and one behind the left slit, each strip of light fading off to the sides, leading to a distribution of light that is simply the sum of the light you’d get passing through each slit. Well, that’s not what happens. Light, it seems, does not behave as if it’s made of particles. Even before Newton’s time, there were observations that challenged his theory of the particle nature of light. For example, light changes course when going from one medium to another-say, from air to glass and back into air (this phenomenon, called refraction, is what allows us to make optical lenses). Refraction can’t be easily explained if you think of light as particles traveling through air and glass, because it requires positing an external force to change the direction of light when it goes from air to glass and from glass to air. But refraction can be explained if light is thought of as a wave (the speed of the wave would be different in air than in glass, explaining the change in direction as light goes from one type of material to another). This is exactly what Dutch scientist Christiaan Huygens proposed in the 1600s. Huygens argued that light is a wave much like a sound wave, and since sound waves are essentially vibrations of the medium in which they are traveling, Huygens argued that light too is made of vibrations of a medium called ether that pervades the space around us. This was a serious theory put forth by an enormously gifted scientist. Huygens was a physicist, astronomer, and mathematician. He made telescopes by grinding lenses himself, and discovered Saturn’s moon Titan (the first probe to land on Titan, in 2005, was named Huygens in his honor). He independently discovered the Orion nebula. In 1690, he published his TraitŽ de la Lumire (Treatise on Light), in which he expounded his wave theory of light. Newton and Huygens were contemporaries, but Newton’s star shone brighter. After all, he had come up with the laws of motion and the universal law of gravitation, which explained everything from the arc of a ball thrown across a field to the movement of planets around the sun. Besides, Newton was a polymath of considerable renown (as a mathematician, he gave us calculus, and even ventured into chemistry, theology, and writing biblical commentaries, not to mention all his work in physics). It was no wonder that his corpuscular theory of light, despite its shortcomings, overshadowed Huygens’s ideas of light being wavelike. It’d take another polymath to show up Newton when it came to understanding light. Thomas Young has been called ÒThe Last Man Who Knew Everything.Ó In 1793, barely twenty years of age, he explained how our eyes focus upon objects at different distances, based partly on his own dissection of an oxÕs eyes. A year later, on the strength of that work, Young was made a Fellow of the Royal Society, and in 1796 he became Òdoctor of physic, surgery, and midwifery.Ó When he was in his forties, Young helped Egyptologists decipher the Rosetta stone (which had inscriptions in three scripts: Greek, hieroglyphics, and something unknown). And in between becoming a medical doctor, getting steeped in Egyptology, and even studying Indo-European languages, Young delivered one of the most intriguing lectures in the history of physics. The venue was the Royal Society of London, and the date, November 24, 1803. Young stood in front of that august audience, this time as a physicist describing a simple and elegant homespun experiment, which, in his mind, had unambiguously established the true nature of light and proved Newton wrong. “The experiments I am about to relate . . . may be repeated with great ease, whenever the sun shines,” Young told the audience. Whenever the sun shines. Young wasn’t overstating the simplicity of his experiment. “I made a small hole in a window-shutter, and covered it with a piece of thick paper, which I perforated with a fine needle,” he said. The pinhole let through a ray of light, a sunbeam. “I brought into the sunbeam a slip of card, about one-thirtieth of an inch in breadth, and observed its shadow, either on the wall, or on other cards held at different distances.” If light is made of particles, Young’s “slip of card” would have cast a sharp shadow on the wall in front, because the card would have blocked some of the particles. And if so, Newton would have been proved right. If, however, light is made of waves, as Huygens claimed, then the card would have merely impeded the waves, like a rock impedes flowing water, and the wave would have gone around the card, taking two paths, one on either side of the card. The two paths of light would eventually recombine at the wall opposite the window shutter to create a characteristic pattern: a row of alternating bright and dark stripes. Such stripes, also known as interference fringes, are created when two waves overlap. Crucially, the central fringe would be bright, exactly where you’d expect a dark shadow if light were made of particles. We know about interference from our everyday experience of waves of water. Think of an ocean wave hitting two openings in a coastal breakwall. New waves emerge from each opening (a process called diffraction) and travel onward, where they overlap and interfere with each other. In regions where the crests of both waves arrive at the same time, there’s constructive interference and the water is at its highest (analogous to bright fringes of light); and in regions where the crest from one wave arrives at the same time as the trough of the other, there’s destructive interference and the water is at its lowest (corresponding to dark fringes). Young saw such optical interference fringes. Specifically, since he was working with sunlight, which contains light of all colors, he saw a central region that was flanked by fringes of colors. The central region, upon closer inspection, was seen to be made of light and dark fringes. The numbers of these fringes and their widths depended on how far away the pinhole in the window shutter was from the screen or wall. And the middle of the central region was always white (a bright fringe). He had shown that light is wavelike. There must have been disbelief in the audience, for Young was going against Newton’s ideas. Even before Young’s lecture, articles written anonymously in the Edinburgh Review had been heavily critical of his work. The author, who turned out to be a barrister named Henry Brougham (he became Lord Chancellor of England in 1830), was scathing, calling Young’s work “destitute of every species of merit” and “the unmanly and unfruitful pleasure of a boyish and prurient imagination.” It was anything but. Soon enough, Young’s ideas got further support from other physicists. His experiment led to what’s now called the double-slit experiment and was in fact the first formulation of it-the very same experiment whose virtues Feynman extolled during his lecture at Cornell. In the more standard double-slit experiment, Young’s sunbeam is replaced by a source of light. And instead of a “slip of card” placed in the sunbeam’s path to create two paths for the light, the double-slit experiment creates two paths of light by letting the light fall on an opaque barrier with two narrow slits or openings through which the light can pass. And on the screen on the far side, you see an interference pattern, essentially fringes similar to what Young saw on the wall opposite the window shutter (if the screen is a photographic plate, or a piece of glass coated with photosensitive material, then the image can be thought of as a film negative: dark regions will form where the film is being exposed to light). You don’t see just two strips tapering away, which you’d expect if light behaved as if it came in lumps. It’s behaving like a wave. Read more

Reviews from Amazon users which were colected at the time this book was published on the website:

⭐Is light made up of particles, waves, or both?And with our evolving collective learning, aided by technologies of our own invention, are we any closer to articulating a particle-wave answer than we were just over two centuries ago?This is the conundrum Anil Ananthaswamy ‘s 2018 treatise, “Through Two Doors at Once: The Elegant Experiment that Captures the Enigma of Our Quantum Reality”, probes and explores. The author is an accomplished internationally recognized writer, editor and teacher on the subject of science writing with a penchant for physics at the University of California, Santa Cruz.Like its subject, quantum physics, this book is informative but requires patience to appreciate the differing views, debates and nuances. You may want to read some, if not all of the discussion, a couple of times. It can be tough to keep track of who said what, when, where and to whom, particularly during the later chapters.The big picture takeaway of assessing what light is and the ramifications for the world seems to be an elusive goal fraught with subjective interpretations despite seemingly objective experiments. With modification to his humorous observation Oscar Wilde might have tersely captured what seems to be going on.Through eight chapters and an epilogue, the author chronicles the evolution of modern thinking about theoretical physics. Using the “double slit” experiment that observes what happens to light when it passes through a tiny hole and reaches a flat surface or measuring device, Ananthaswamy demonstrates the efforts of various scientists to explain and muse about this experience.The first chapters cover the origin of the early nineteenth century experiment with Thomas Young’s conclusion that, contrary to Isaac Newton’s classical interpretation, light may be made of waves, not particles. The debate is far from over as Einstein asserts light is made of “quanta” or photons subject to the laws of gravity.Concurrent with Einstein during the early twentieth century, Bohr, Heisenberg and Schrodinger developed quantum mechanics and the Copenhagen Interpretation estimating probable locations of particles (photons). It had a big impact – like influencing the development of the atomic bomb.However, they did not give up the possibility of a light as a wave – suggesting the act of observation collapses wavefunctions into particles with fixed positions. A twist with potential philosophical interpretations.Later chapters follow post-World War II thinking about the theoretical duality of entangled particles, separated at birth but still interacting (“spooky actions at a distance”). Some of this has led to possible multiple world scenarios. Popular media such as the “Fringe” TV series has seized on this theory as a launch point for various plot lines. Though dense, the coverage is fresh for the uninitiated, like myself.Additionally, the subjective role of an observer is scrutinized leading to how each person adds to the complexity of experience – not unlike witnesses at a crime scene giving conflicting testimony at a trial about what they saw or interpreted what they saw. In theoretical physics even consensus on observed phenomena is hard to reach.The author identifies three helpful characteristics of the various theories, either shared or separating one from another:• Delivering predictable or variable actions (determinism);• Impacting only the neighborhood or further afield (locality);• Existing as independent events or only through the eyes of the beholder (realism).A second understated development is technology to test and measure results. In the fifth chapter an entertaining description of experiments replicating the double-slit exercise are carried out on mountaintops in the Canary Islands. These are made possible by newer devices isolating and tracking single photons. Even noted physicist Roger Penrose has suggested replicating these tests in Earth’s outer orbit.Despite the technology advances a conclusive answer for explaining observed phenomena continues to be hotly debated with proofs and counterproofs making later chapters twisty to track. They seem to be something out Luigi Pirandello’s 1921 play, “Six Characters in search of an Author” – each with part of a possible whole solution for the theoretical puzzle. Practically speaking, what this means for me today is still on hold.As an alternative examination of recent thinking, you might try Carlo Rovelli’s 2017 trim and entertaining work, “Reality Is Not What It Seems” (if it helps, here’s the link to my Amazon review of his work: https://www.amazon.com/review/RBQ7DZK8BFF9W/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8)In the meantime, experiencing “Through Two Doors at Once” begs the subjective answer to the familiar age-old universal question: “It was good for me. How was it for you?”

⭐The world of quantum phenomena is truly weird. It is hard to wrap your head around it. But by repeatedly returning to the two slit experiment this book makes that world accessible to a wide audience. It then branches off into simple, clear explanations of various experiments and their results to make the specifics of that weirdness completely understandable. At the same time it takes us through various attempts to organize and make sense of it all. It starts with Bohr’s Copenhagen interpretation, the approach still favored by most physicists. But it also takes us on a tour through other approaches including my favorite, the one attributed primarily to Bohm.This is not my first trip to this particular rodeo. But with previous surveys I have been left with various head scratchers. The one that has bugged me the most for the longest is the “measurement” problem that is often associated with entanglement. Under certain circumstances entangled systems of particles collapse. According to a popular line of thinking one necessary circumstance is that something needs to be measured by an “observer”. And apparently this observer needs to be a sentient being. That makes no sense to me. But the origins of and justification for this line of thinking is laid out clearly and explained thoroughly. So now I understand why people think the way they do. I am just more than ever convinced they are wrong.This happened to me with several things I have been stewing over for years. I now feel that I have a much better grasp on them. I have even been introduced to new things to puzzle over. But in all cases the reader is kept grounded and oriented. If this is your first introduction to this subject or your tenth you will find much clarification of both the ideas and the experiments that underpin the ideas. I can’t recommend this book enough.

⭐I really liked that this book is a story or tour through quantum history. Yet, it is also a careful exposition of the various approaches to understanding both our classical and quantum realities, possibly one and the same.

⭐I greatly enjoyed reading Ananthaswamy’s book. Quantum mechanics, despite its unquestionable success, is, after more than ninety years, still plagued with challenging interpretational problems, and I appreciate his approach to the subject. I would merely like to make some remarks related to a point that is not clear in the literature. I think a distinction should be made between “interaction-free” (IF) and “null-result” or “negative-result” (NR) experiments. The idea of NR experiments was introduced by M. Renninger in 1960 (strictly speaking, P. S. Epstein, already in 1945, was a precursor in this field). R. H. Dicke, in 1981, also discusses an NR experiment, but introduces the term interaction-free. In these experiments the absence of detection reduces the state vector. A. Elitzur and L. Vaidman suggest an interesting, albeit different experiment. In this case, the detection of a photon allows us to infer the presence of an absorbing object. Unfortunately, they also use the term introduced by Dicke, which leads to confusion.I also would like to add that the very same idea of the important experiment performed by Irvine, Hodelin, Simon, and Bouwmeester was introduced in my presentation in the 3rd Workshop on Mysteries, Puzzles and Paradoxes in Quantum Mechanics, in 2000. It was published in 2001, and further developed in the same year in another article (L. C. Ryff and P. H. S. Ribeiro, Phys. Rev. A, 63, 023801). (References can be found in L. C. Ryff, arxiv: 1509.04673.)

⭐Hard going. This is an attempt to summarize current thinking about the simplest and most puzzling demonstration of the dual, wave and particle nature of the microscopic world: the `double slit.’ The quantum-mechanical `paradoxes’ of wave-particle duality are explained as well as the author can while avoiding all mathematics. But I think a few more, and simpler diagrams would have helped me follow his arguments about the variants of the classic double-slit experiment and the range of interpretations put upon them. i e how does a particle `know’ it has been through one of two slits, and how does it `know; it has been detected in the act and therefore `decides’ not to be a wave after all and not to interfere with others.I shall try and read the book again, but it is easy to be swept along by the words, and suddenly realise you’ve lost their drift. And the detailed descriptions of physicists’ appearances, offices, houses, and lifestyle could be usefully omitted.By the way, I’m a professional physicist.

⭐Explores one of the most counter-intuitive ideas of quantum mechanics – the dual wave/particle nature of light, electrons, and much else. Describes the experiments that give the surprising results, and the attempts to understand them. Well worth reading.

⭐An informative book on a subject devoid of clarity and so this is a much needed book. One or two lazy mistakes due to the cut and paste nature of its creation but despite this I am very happy with the book.

⭐Excellent book making clear a complex subject

⭐What is reality?

Keywords

Free Download Through Two Doors at Once: The Elegant Experiment That Captures the Enigma of Our Quantum Reality in PDF format
Through Two Doors at Once: The Elegant Experiment That Captures the Enigma of Our Quantum Reality PDF Free Download
Download Through Two Doors at Once: The Elegant Experiment That Captures the Enigma of Our Quantum Reality 2018 PDF Free
Through Two Doors at Once: The Elegant Experiment That Captures the Enigma of Our Quantum Reality 2018 PDF Free Download
Download Through Two Doors at Once: The Elegant Experiment That Captures the Enigma of Our Quantum Reality PDF
Free Download Ebook Through Two Doors at Once: The Elegant Experiment That Captures the Enigma of Our Quantum Reality