Fascinating and apparently replicating results for a century! I agree and to understand the experiment's intractability, I need to know more about the conditions under which the results were measured without "observation". Were electrons, et al, fired at a wall with slits in a room devoid of observers, utilizing some kind of delayed turn-on switch? And the results reviewed after the fact? How can you possibly control the experiment to the extent that the only difference leading to this "weird" result is the presence of an observer? Is the equipment used in measuring the same as when observing and measuring? (Has anyone observed from an adjacent room through a window?) My scientific background is non-extant and I'm striving to understand what an objective experiment in this case would look like.
Add new comment
Some practical tips to help you when you need it most!
As COP28, the 2023 United Nations Climate Change Conference, kicks off we look at how maths can help understand the climate crisis.
How do you create dramatic film out of mathematics? We find out with writer and director Timothy Lanzone.
Mathematics plays a central role in understanding how infectious diseases spread. This collection of articles looks at some basic concepts in epidemiology to help you understand this fascinating and important field, and set you up for further study.
Find out why the formula we use to work out conditional probabilities is true!
- We talk about a play that explores the fascinating mathematical collaboration between the mathematicians GH Hardy and Srinivasa Ramanujan.