Testing double-slit experiment using entangled particles

[Strange]

I did not explain why I added the serial numbers, that's why you guys don't understand it completely. It's really a waste of energy to spend time on it though, I will not need it since the experiment is null. Serial numbers are for tracking, and I wanted to do tracking. The reason it is this way is because as particles are being sent one-at-a-time, we know which particle we are sending and when we are sending it. So when it lands on the back wall, I could point to that specific particle and say, "this particle was the 4th particle we sent, this particles pair is in this box."

 

You still haven't explained why you want to do this. All the particles are identical, so why does it matter which one it was?

 

Also, why go to all the trouble of storing them. Why not just generate them when you need them?

[truedeity]

"Because I wanted too. "

 

I just preferred it that way, I wanted the experiment to provide as much information as possible so that if any technical issues came out that bookkeeping it would be embedded in the experiment. Suppose for example the experiment is not null, and particles pass through the slit, and in doing so the spin direction is changed. (Side note- perhaps it is possible that this does not cause decoherence, e.g. when a magnetic fields changes the spin of the particle, I think we have to get deeper into conservation laws to identify that this does indeed decohere just to ensure this experiment is truly null.) If the results on the wall display an interference pattern, one may prefer having more information, like to have the ability to measure the spin direction, of each particle, and knowing which particle it corresponds with on the wall, is like the Rosetta stone version of this experiment. It gives you bits of accounting that you might want to have. Because we sill need to answer the fundamental questions of the experiment, as to the nature of particles and its wave like behavior, etc...

[Strange]

Because we sill need to answer the fundamental questions of the experiment, as to the nature of particles and its wave like behavior, etc...

 

As the experiment (and all the variations) produce exactly the predicted results, what fundamental question is not answered by it?

 

I can see there might be fundamental questions about the interpretation or meaning of QM, but this experiment is so well explored, and fails to show any hints of new science that I would be surprised if any insights come from it. In other words, if someone comes up with a new hypothesis that extends the current theory, I imagine any experiment to test that would be very different from this.