I liked the bounce of the round aperture. The center moved first and the outside moved in a wave function. Was that from the aperture turning away from perpendicular?
At 0:56 your hand is right in the path of what should be the part of the beam creating the corresponding reflections, and still, it remains untouched by the beam! No light rays are reaching the screen, except at the center!
There are no reflections. And the diffraction happens at the slit, not later. I think the Pilot wave theory provides a better explanation for this experiment. If you're not familiar with the Pilot wave theory, try the Veritasium video titled "Is This What Quantum Mechanics Looks Like?" And note that since all we're seeing around 0:56 in this video is a line so we cannot know if the camera is higher or lower than the plane of the light.
@@MikkoRantalainen Interesting, but I must admit that I still have some reservations. One can deduce the height of the light source by the changes on the screen. Besides, the presenter stands next to it at the start of the video. Concerning the lack of reflections and the diffraction starting at the slit, I wonder what you mean exactly. In my layman's view, either the reflections are created when rays/waves hit the screen, or they can be created at a distance, without any rays/waves touching the screen at the corresponding locations. The latter case is very strange, and i have no satisfactory explanation for it. Of course, if the light rays/waves are reaching the screen at the locations of the different reflections, then the mystery is solved. Concerning your reference to quantum theory, I would much prefer a down to earth explanation. Do you have one?
A wavefront is a plane where the particles of the wave are vibrating in the same phase. When this plane is circular in shape, it's called a circular wavefront. Same phase here means nature of movement.
I tried doing this with a divider and using my phone flashlight. I made two holes using a divider one mm apart on an opaque surface. I could only see the circular diffraction pattern. My original intention was to recreate the double slit but I failed to do that. My holes were too big.
@2:55 ..... ok I now notice your correction added visually. Anyway, how can these small slits/apertures be made? You are obviously using some sophisticated device but what assurance does the spectator have that you are not just flashing pictures up and telling a made up story? There's a lot of fluff on youtube about Young's Double Slit experiment, but a double slit interference pattern isn't surprising if a single slit produces a pattern. Puzzling over the double slit result without understanding the single slit result is..... odd.
Light is an alternating current. It's obvious when pointed through the round hole. Light hits the screen, reflects back to the hole, back to the screen but more diffuse,..... rinse and repeat. Make sure you use a non reflective surface on the back side of your slit. Your experiment is similar to looking in a mirror pointed back at a mirror. Are there really 50 of you leaning one direction or the other? No, it's all reflections and your controlling them.
