Human eye sees one photon, can test Quantum mechanics

[Blumlein 88]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-human-eye-could-help-test-quantum-mechanics/

I've read of other tests indicating it probably was so that one photon can be detected by the human eye.

Plenty interesting here. One related to blind testing (with eyes no less) is only about 10% of the photons reaching the eye make it to the rods to be perceived. So testing that with human volunteers is a little different.

Then on the other hand, according to some audiophile abilities, they'd have to be hearing one electron or in some cases less than one electron in a circuit. Maybe they should forget about eyes, and switch to ears that ear movements of sub-atomic particles possibly even quarks.

 

[RayDunzl]

How, practically, do you generate a single photon?

---

If a single photon can be detected by the eye, and we call that 0dB, standing outside on a sunny day (3×10^14 photons per eye per second - 300,000,000,000,000) would be 289dB range.

 

[SIY]

There are no ideal single photon sources (damn that Heisenberg fellow!), but they can be approximated several different ways (maybe more, I've been out of that world for some years now). We used single molecule emission, but I think there's also laser methods like 4 wave mixing.

 

[Pio2001]

How, practically, do you generate a single photon?

Hi RayDunzl,
The process is explained in the original article : https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.08430
Open the PDF version, and look page 3. It is too complicated to summarize here

 

[RayDunzl]

Open the PDF version, and look page 3. It is too complicated to summarize here

Thank you.

 

[Ron Texas]

This quantum mechanics stuff is a bit beyond me. I have trouble understanding something can be on and off at the same time plus be capable of other complex states.

 

[AndrewDavis]

This quantum mechanics stuff is a bit beyond me. I have trouble understanding something can be on and off at the same time plus be capable of other complex states.

Be the spoon, Ron.

I have always had a hard time with quantum mechanics. It's so foreign to our life experience. I have read a few books that have moved me closer to understating, all have titles that sound something like "Quantum Mechanics for Non Physicists"

And by understanding, i mean understanding on a descriptive and metaphorical level. I will never ever have the math...not even if I start studying today.

 

[restorer-john]

I have trouble understanding something can be on and off at the same time plus be capable of other complex states.

This book might help...

 

[Wombat]

Be the spoon, Ron.

I have always had a hard time with quantum mechanics. It's so foreign to our life experience. I have read a few books that have moved me closer to understating, all have titles that sound something like "Quantum Mechanics for Non Physicists"

And by understanding, i mean understanding on a descriptive and metaphorical level. I will never ever have the math...not even if I start studying today.

It gets even spookier. Time(t) can be cancelled from some equations.

 

[Wombat]

This book might help...

View attachment 31929

You wrote that?

 

[Ron Texas]

This book might help...

View attachment 31929

I learned how to do that ages ago.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-human-eye-could-help-test-quantum-mechanics/
I've read of other tests indicating it probably was so that one photon can be detected by the human eye.

This is not a surprise. There have been dozens of papers demonstrating individual photoreceptor response to a single photon since about 1970.

 

[AndrewDavis]

This book might help...

View attachment 31929

This goes well beyond the capabilities of the scientific method to dicern order among the disorder of the universe.

 

[TimF]

This book might help...

View attachment 31929

This is not true: Perhaps Lacan suggested that men/males were specified; following that, women are specified by being not men. And love objects (per Freud) are not-mother. Not-mother is a form of negation.

 

[RayDunzl]

Then on the other hand, according to some audiophile abilities, they'd have to be hearing one electron or in some cases less than one electron in a circuit.

I don't know if you can have "less than one electron".

But if one Ampere = 0dBFS then one electron = ?

By my hurried yet belated calculation, between (or somewhere around) -373dBFS and -378dBFS

That power difference, if applied to sonic power generation, exceeds even Rob Watts hearing acuity and would require we resurrect Chuck Norris for the listening test.

Wait a minute... He's Chuck Norris, he can resurrect himself.

 

[mansr]

But if one Ampere = 0dBFS then one electron = ?

By my hurried yet belated calculation, between (or somewhere around) -373dBFS and -378dBFS

-376 dB by my reckoning.

That power difference, if applied to sonic power generation, exceeds even Rob Watts hearing acuity

At a nominal 2 V that's about 320 zeptowatts. If Mr Watts is of normal human size, that's roughly 25 femtograms, or 1/40th of the weight of one E coli bacterium.

resurrect Chuck Norris

He's not dead yet, is he?

 

[RayDunzl]

Hmm...

Fooled me, somehow...