In the double-slit experiment with electrons, suppose that the observer uses a detector to determine through which slit the electron actually passes. Does this affect the outcome of the experiment, and why or why not?
A) No, the pattern on the screen remains an interference pattern, regardless of the detector.
B) No, the pattern on the screen remains a non-interference pattern, regardless of the detector.
C) Yes, the detector causes the pattern on the screen to suddenly change from an interference pattern with no detector to two tiny spots directly behind each slit with the detector.
D) Yes, the detector causes the pattern on the screen to suddenly change from an interference pattern with no detector to a non-interference pattern with the detector.
E) Yes, the detector causes the pattern on the screen to suddenly change from a non-interference pattern with no detector to an interference pattern with the detector.
Question 2
Regarding the validity of Ptolemy's and Copernicus' theories:
A) Ptolemy was proven wrong and Copernicus was proven right.
B) they were both good theories, but Ptolemy's point of view ultimately turned out to be more useful.
C) the experimental facts known in Copernicus' time tended to support Copernicus' theory over Ptolemy's.
D) they were both wrong and useless theories.
E) they were both good theories, but Copernicus' point of view ultimately turned out to be more useful.
Double-label fluorescence microscopy can visualize the relative distributions of
Pavlov’s Salivary Conditioning Experiment (1 of 2)
Denaturation of DNA when native (double-stranded)
The transfer experiment that demonstrated the existence of RNA primers in DNA replication
Monkey Experiment: Sense of Fairness
Visual Cliff Experiment