I
itullian
Guest
anyone know about this? how can it be?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
R
Redeemed92
Guest
In order to observe anything, subatomic or not, you have to interact with it in some way; directly or indirectly. In order to interact with a subatomic particle–to “observe” it–you have to interact with it. Subatomic particles are extremely fragile things. If you shoot a single photon of light at an electron, it alters its behavior because of momentum transfer from the light.
Think of it this way, in order to see something, you have to bounce something off it and receive it. We don’t notice this in our everyday lives because photons are small and we are big. So let’s make an analogy to get a sense of what happens at the subatomic level. Let’s blow everything up to scale: an electron is now the size of a car. But at this level, a photon is the size of a basketball. So now in order to see the electron, we have to bounce basketballs (photons) off it! The fact is that we have to interact with the particle in order to observe it, and, I don’t know about you, but having basketballs thrown at me would surely alter my behavior (namely, I would run!)
I hope that makes sense. I can probably explain more
Think of it this way, in order to see something, you have to bounce something off it and receive it. We don’t notice this in our everyday lives because photons are small and we are big. So let’s make an analogy to get a sense of what happens at the subatomic level. Let’s blow everything up to scale: an electron is now the size of a car. But at this level, a photon is the size of a basketball. So now in order to see the electron, we have to bounce basketballs (photons) off it! The fact is that we have to interact with the particle in order to observe it, and, I don’t know about you, but having basketballs thrown at me would surely alter my behavior (namely, I would run!)
I hope that makes sense. I can probably explain more
I
itullian
Guest
i don’t get it. our eyes are recievers not senders. we recieve the light and see, no?
I
itullian
Guest
if i observe someone thru a see thru mirror, i don’t change their behavior.
A
Aelred_Minor
Guest
It’s one of those scientific clichés to say that anything you observe you also change. This is because in the case of more macro-level scientific observation it’s generally impossible to avoid some influence over whatever you are observing. For example, Jane Goodall extensively observed wild chimpanzee behavior, but no doubt the chimps behaved a bit differently than they would have if a human were not sitting nearby, watching them. Or on a much lesser level, if you are standing next to an ice cube watching it melt your body heat and the way your breath and movements stir the air may slightly increase the rate of melting, even though this difference may be so slight as to be completely negligable.
In the case of subatomic particles I would look for a mechanism to explain a potential change in the behavior before I would accept that the idea applies on such a fine scale. Unfortuately my knowledge of physics is far less than I would like it to be, so I don’t know what that mechanism would be.
Of course, studies on sub-atomic particles will often be active experiments rather than passive observation (it’s not exactly easy to observe individual sub-atomic particles, after all, except in the effects of their cumulative behavior). In these cases, while we may be influencing the behavior of the particles though whatever the experimental method is that does not mean the conclusions of the experiment do not shed light on their ordinary behavior.
In the case of subatomic particles I would look for a mechanism to explain a potential change in the behavior before I would accept that the idea applies on such a fine scale. Unfortuately my knowledge of physics is far less than I would like it to be, so I don’t know what that mechanism would be.
Of course, studies on sub-atomic particles will often be active experiments rather than passive observation (it’s not exactly easy to observe individual sub-atomic particles, after all, except in the effects of their cumulative behavior). In these cases, while we may be influencing the behavior of the particles though whatever the experimental method is that does not mean the conclusions of the experiment do not shed light on their ordinary behavior.
R
Redeemed92
Guest
Itullian:
You are correct. Our eyes are not senders, they are receivers. They do receive light, and then we see.
I think the problem comes in with the working definition of the word “observe” as you used it. In the everyday language, when we say observe, we usually mean: to see with our eyes. But this is not how science uses the word.
Let’s take the process of observing back one step. Before the light is received in our eyes, it bounces of the things in the room. If you look at someone through a mirror, what is it you are seeing? You are receiving the light that has bounced off the person’s face, then bounced off the mirror and has entered your retinas. You haven’t done anything. The LIGHT has done everything, e.g. bounced, reflected.
When you say “behavior”, in science speak, this usually refers to the speed and direction a particle is moving.
When you say “Observing a sub-atomic particle changes its behavior”, what this really means (in physics, at least), is more like
“When you hit a cue ball off of another billiard ball on a table, the billiard ball is deflected and moves away from the cue ball”
Aelred Minor: This really does not have much to do with the type of experiment, as much as a fundamental principle of observation. I can work out the math for you for the mechanism in physics for which I believe you are looking for, if you would like.
You are correct. Our eyes are not senders, they are receivers. They do receive light, and then we see.
I think the problem comes in with the working definition of the word “observe” as you used it. In the everyday language, when we say observe, we usually mean: to see with our eyes. But this is not how science uses the word.
Let’s take the process of observing back one step. Before the light is received in our eyes, it bounces of the things in the room. If you look at someone through a mirror, what is it you are seeing? You are receiving the light that has bounced off the person’s face, then bounced off the mirror and has entered your retinas. You haven’t done anything. The LIGHT has done everything, e.g. bounced, reflected.
When you say “behavior”, in science speak, this usually refers to the speed and direction a particle is moving.
When you say “Observing a sub-atomic particle changes its behavior”, what this really means (in physics, at least), is more like
“When you hit a cue ball off of another billiard ball on a table, the billiard ball is deflected and moves away from the cue ball”
Aelred Minor: This really does not have much to do with the type of experiment, as much as a fundamental principle of observation. I can work out the math for you for the mechanism in physics for which I believe you are looking for, if you would like.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.