Quantum mechanics/Course/Wave-particle duality quiz/Testbank

Wave particle duality quiz version B
{The (wave) second segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a) true -b)  false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a) true -b)  false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a) true +b)  false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. -b)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. +c) Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -d)  The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. -e) All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a)   Taylor in 1909. +b) Young in 1801. -c)  Schroedinger in 1926. -d) Newton in 1704. -e)  Heisenberg in 1925. {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv. This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a) By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. +b)  While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -c) If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. -d)  By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a) true -b)  false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a) true +b)  false {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin. The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty. To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly. A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +b)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -c)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} -a) Young in 1801. -b)  Davisson and Germer in 1925. +c)  Taylor in 1909. -d)  Newton in 1704. -e) Aspect in 1982.

Wave particle duality quiz version C
{The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a) Schroedinger in 1926. -b)  Newton in 1704. +c) Young in 1801. -d)   Taylor in 1909. -e) Heisenberg in 1925. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a)  true -b) false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a)  true -b) false {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv.  This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a)  If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. +b) While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -c)  By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. -d) By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. {The (wave) second  segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a)  true -b) false {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time.  This experiment was first performed by} -a)  Davisson and Germer in 1925. +b)  Taylor in 1909. -c)  Newton in 1704. -d) Aspect in 1982. -e)  Young in 1801. {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. -b)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. +c) Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -d)  The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. -e) All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a)  true +b) false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a)  true +b) false {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin.  The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty.  To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly.  A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +c)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$

Wave particle duality quiz version D
{An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv. This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} +a) While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -b)  If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. -c) By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. -d)  By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a) true +b)  false {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} -a) Davisson and Germer in 1925. +b)   Taylor in 1909. -c) Aspect in 1982. -d)  Young in 1801. -e) Newton in 1704. {The (wave) second  segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a)  true -b) false {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin.  The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty.  To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly.  A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +c)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. -b)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. -c) The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. +d)  Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -e) All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a)  true -b) false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a)  true +b) false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a)  true -b) false {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a)  Heisenberg in 1925. -b) Newton in 1704. +c)  Young in 1801. -d)  Taylor in 1909. -e)  Schroedinger in 1926.

Wave particle duality quiz version E
{The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a) true +b)  false {The (wave) second segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a) true -b)  false {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} +a)  Taylor in 1909. -b)  Newton in 1704. -c) Aspect in 1982. -d)  Davisson and Germer in 1925. -e) Young in 1801. {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a)  Schroedinger in 1926. -b) Heisenberg in 1925. -c)   Taylor in 1909. +d) Young in 1801. -e)  Newton in 1704. {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin. The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty. To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly. A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } +a)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -c)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a) true -b)  false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. -b)  The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. +c) Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -d)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. -e) All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a)  true +b) false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a)  true -b) false {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv.  This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} +a)  While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -b) If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. -c)  By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. -d) By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit.

Wave particle duality quiz version F
{The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a) true -b)  false {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin. The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty. To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly. A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +c)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a) true -b)  false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a) All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. +b)  Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -c) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. -d)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. -e) The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a)  true +b) false {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv.  This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a)  By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. +b) While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -c)  By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. -d) If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a)  Schroedinger in 1926. +b) Young in 1801. -c)  Heisenberg in 1925. -d) Newton in 1704. -e)   Taylor in 1909. {The (wave) second segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a) true -b)  false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a) true +b)  false {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} +a)  Taylor in 1909. -b)  Newton in 1704. -c) Aspect in 1982. -d)  Young in 1801. -e) Davisson and Germer in 1925.

Wave particle duality quiz version G
{A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} -a) Aspect in 1982. -b)  Newton in 1704. -c) Davisson and Germer in 1925. +d)   Taylor in 1909. -e) Young in 1801. {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin.  The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty.  To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly.  A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +b)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -c)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a)  Taylor in 1909. +b)  Young in 1801. -c) Schroedinger in 1926. -d)  Heisenberg in 1925. -e) Newton in 1704. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a)  true -b) false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a)  true +b) false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a)  true +b) false {The (wave) second  segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a)  true -b) false {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv.  This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a)  If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. -b) By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. +c)  While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -d) By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a)  true -b) false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} +a)  Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -b) All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. -c)  The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. -d) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. -e)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles.

Wave particle duality quiz version H
{Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a) true -b)  false {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} +a)  Taylor in 1909. -b)  Davisson and Germer in 1925. -c) Young in 1801. -d)  Aspect in 1982. -e) Newton in 1704. {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin.  The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty.  To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly.  A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -c)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +d)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a) The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. -b)  All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. -c) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. -d)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. +e) Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv.  This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a)  By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. -b) If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. +c)  While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -d) By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a)  true +b) false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a)  true -b) false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a)  true +b) false {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a)  Schroedinger in 1926. -b) Heisenberg in 1925. -c)  Newton in 1704. +d) Young in 1801. -e)   Taylor in 1909. {The (wave) second segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a) true -b)  false

Wave particle duality quiz version I
{A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} +a)  Taylor in 1909. -b)  Aspect in 1982. -c) Newton in 1704. -d)  Davisson and Germer in 1925. -e) Young in 1801. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a)  true -b) false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a)  All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. -b) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. -c)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. +d) Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -e)  The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin. The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty. To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly. A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +b)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -c)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ {The (wave) second  segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a) true -b)  false {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a) Heisenberg in 1925. -b)  Newton in 1704. -c)  Taylor in 1909. +d)  Young in 1801. -e) Schroedinger in 1926. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a)  true +b) false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a)  true +b) false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a)  true -b) false {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv.  This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a)  By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. +b) While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -c)  By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. -d) If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path.

Wave particle duality quiz version J
{Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a) true +b)  false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a) All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. -b)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. -c) The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. +d)  Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -e) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a)  Heisenberg in 1925. -b) Schroedinger in 1926. -c)   Taylor in 1909. -d) Newton in 1704. +e)  Young in 1801. {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv. This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a) By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. -b)  By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. +c) While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -d)  If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a) true +b)  false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a) true -b)  false {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} -a) Davisson and Germer in 1925. -b)  Aspect in 1982. +c)  Taylor in 1909. -d)  Young in 1801. -e) Newton in 1704. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a)  true -b) false {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin.  The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty.  To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly.  A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +b)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -c)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ {The (wave) second segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a) true -b)  false

Wave particle duality quiz version K
{An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. +b)  Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -c) The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. -d)  All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. -e) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time.  This experiment was first performed by} -a)  Aspect in 1982. -b) Young in 1801. -c)  Davisson and Germer in 1925. +d)  Taylor in 1909. -e)  Newton in 1704. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a) true +b)  false {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin. The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty. To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly. A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ +c)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ {The (wave) second  segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a) true -b)  false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a) true -b)  false {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv. This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a) By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. -b)  If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. -c) By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. +d)  While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a) true +b)  false {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a) Newton in 1704. +b)  Young in 1801. -c) Schroedinger in 1926. -d)  Heisenberg in 1925. -e)  Taylor in 1909. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a)  true -b) false

Wave particle duality quiz version L
{The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a) true +b)  false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a) true +b)  false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a) true -b)  false {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv. This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} +a) While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -b)  By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. -c) By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. -d)  If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a) Newton in 1704. -b)   Taylor in 1909. -c) Heisenberg in 1925. +d)  Young in 1801. -e) Schroedinger in 1926. {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time.  This experiment was first performed by} -a)  Newton in 1704. -b) Davisson and Germer in 1925. +c)   Taylor in 1909. -d) Young in 1801. -e)  Aspect in 1982. {The (wave) second segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a) true -b)  false {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin. The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty. To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly. A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -c)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +d)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a) true -b)  false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. -b)  The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. -c) All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. +d)  Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -e) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles.

Wave particle duality quiz version M
{The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a) true -b)  false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} +a) Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -b)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. -c) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. -d)  All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. -e) The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv.  This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a)  By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. -b) By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. +c)  While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -d) If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a)  true +b) false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a)  true -b) false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a)  true +b) false {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a)  Heisenberg in 1925. -b)  Taylor in 1909. -c)  Schroedinger in 1926. +d) Young in 1801. -e)  Newton in 1704. {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} -a) Davisson and Germer in 1925. -b)  Aspect in 1982. -c) Young in 1801. -d)  Newton in 1704. +e)  Taylor in 1909. {The (wave) second  segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a)  true -b) false {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin.  The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty.  To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly.  A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -c)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +d)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$

Wave particle duality quiz version N
{The (wave) second segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a) true -b)  false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a) true -b)  false {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a) Heisenberg in 1925. -b)   Taylor in 1909. -c) Newton in 1704. -d)  Schroedinger in 1926. +e) Young in 1801. {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin.  The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty.  To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly.  A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -c)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +d)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a) true -b)  false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a) true +b)  false {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv. This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a) By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. -b)  If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. +c) While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -d)  By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a) true +b)  false {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} +a)  Taylor in 1909. -b)  Davisson and Germer in 1925. -c) Newton in 1704. -d)  Young in 1801. -e) Aspect in 1982. {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} +a)  Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -b) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. -c)  The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. -d) All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. -e)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles.

Wave particle duality quiz version O
{The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a) true -b)  false {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin. The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty. To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly. A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } +a)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -c)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a) true +b)  false {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} +a)  Taylor in 1909. -b)  Davisson and Germer in 1925. -c) Newton in 1704. -d)  Aspect in 1982. -e) Young in 1801. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a)  true -b) false {The (wave) second  segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a)  true -b) false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a)  All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. -b) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. +c)  Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -d) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. -e)  The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv. This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a) By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. -b)  By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. +c) While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -d)  If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} +a) Young in 1801. -b)   Taylor in 1909. -c) Heisenberg in 1925. -d)  Newton in 1704. -e) Schroedinger in 1926. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a)  true +b) false

Wave particle duality quiz version P
{The (wave) second segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a) true -b)  false {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a) Heisenberg in 1925. -b)   Taylor in 1909. -c) Schroedinger in 1926. -d)  Newton in 1704. +e) Young in 1801. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a)  true -b) false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a)  true +b) false {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv.  This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a)  By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. -b) By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. -c)  If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. +d) While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time.  This experiment was first performed by} +a)   Taylor in 1909. -b) Davisson and Germer in 1925. -c)  Young in 1801. -d) Newton in 1704. -e)  Aspect in 1982. {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin. The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty. To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly. A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +c)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a) true -b)  false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. -b)  All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. +c) Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -d)  The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. -e) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a)  true +b) false

Wave particle duality quiz version Q
{A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin. The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty. To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly. A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +c)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a) true -b)  false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a) true -b)  false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a) All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. -b)  The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. +c) Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -d)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. -e) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a)  Heisenberg in 1925. +b) Young in 1801. -c)   Taylor in 1909. -d) Schroedinger in 1926. -e)  Newton in 1704. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a) true +b)  false {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} +a)  Taylor in 1909. -b)  Young in 1801. -c) Davisson and Germer in 1925. -d)  Newton in 1704. -e) Aspect in 1982. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a)  true +b) false {The (wave) second  segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a)  true -b) false {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv.  This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a)  By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. -b) By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. +c)  While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -d) If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path.

Wave particle duality quiz version R
{A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} -a) Newton in 1704. -b)  Aspect in 1982. -c) Davisson and Germer in 1925. -d)  Young in 1801. +e)  Taylor in 1909. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a)  true +b) false {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv.  This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a)  By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. +b) While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -c)  If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. -d) By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin.  The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty.  To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly.  A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } +a)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -b) $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -c)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -d) $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a)  true +b) false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} +a)  Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -b) All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. -c)  The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. -d) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. -e)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. {The (wave) second segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a) true -b)  false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a) true -b)  false {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a) Newton in 1704. -b)  Heisenberg in 1925. +c) Young in 1801. -d)   Taylor in 1909. -e) Schroedinger in 1926. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a)  true -b) false

Wave particle duality quiz version S
{Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a) true -b)  false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a) true +b)  false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. -b)  The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. -c) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. +d)  Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -e) All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a)  true +b) false {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv.  This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a)  By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. +b) While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -c)  If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. -d) By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a)  Newton in 1704. -b)  Taylor in 1909. -c)  Schroedinger in 1926. +d) Young in 1801. -e)  Heisenberg in 1925. {The (wave) second segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a) true -b)  false {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin. The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty. To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly. A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -c)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +d)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} -a) Davisson and Germer in 1925. -b)  Young in 1801. +c)  Taylor in 1909. -d)  Newton in 1704. -e) Aspect in 1982. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a)  true -b) false

Wave particle duality quiz version T
{A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin. The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty. To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly. A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +b)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -c)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a)  The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. -b)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. -c) All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. -d)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. +e) Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time.  This experiment was first performed by} -a)  Aspect in 1982. +b)  Taylor in 1909. -c)  Newton in 1704. -d) Davisson and Germer in 1925. -e)  Young in 1801. {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a) Heisenberg in 1925. -b)   Taylor in 1909. -c) Newton in 1704. -d)  Schroedinger in 1926. +e) Young in 1801. {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv.  This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a)  By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. -b) If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. -c)  By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. +d) While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a)  true -b) false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a)  true +b) false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a)  true -b) false {The (wave) second  segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a)  true -b) false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a)  true +b) false

Wave particle duality quiz version U
{The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a) true -b)  false {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin. The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty. To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly. A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -c)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +d)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a) true -b)  false {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} -a) Young in 1801. -b)  Davisson and Germer in 1925. -c) Aspect in 1982. +d)   Taylor in 1909. -e) Newton in 1704. {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a)  Schroedinger in 1926. +b) Young in 1801. -c)  Heisenberg in 1925. -d)  Taylor in 1909. -e)  Newton in 1704. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a) true +b)  false {The (wave) second segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a) true -b)  false {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv. This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a) By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. +b)  While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -c) By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. -d)  If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a) true +b)  false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. -b)  All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. -c) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. +d)  Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -e) The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit.

Wave particle duality quiz version V
{A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} +a)  Taylor in 1909. -b)  Davisson and Germer in 1925. -c) Young in 1801. -d)  Newton in 1704. -e) Aspect in 1982. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a)  true +b) false {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a)  Newton in 1704. +b) Young in 1801. -c)  Schroedinger in 1926. -d) Heisenberg in 1925. -e)   Taylor in 1909. {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin. The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty. To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly. A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ +c)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv.  This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a)  If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. -b) By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. -c)  By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. +d) While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). {The (wave) second  segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a)  true -b) false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a)  true +b) false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a)  true -b) false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} +a)  Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -b) The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. -c)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. -d) All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. -e)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a) true -b)  false

Wave particle duality quiz version W
{The (wave) second segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a) true -b)  false {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} +a) Young in 1801. -b)  Schroedinger in 1926. -c) Heisenberg in 1925. -d)   Taylor in 1909. -e) Newton in 1704. {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv.  This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a)  By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. -b) By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. +c)  While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -d) If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin.  The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty.  To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly.  A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } +a) $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -c) $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a) true -b)  false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a) true +b)  false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} +a) Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -b)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. -c) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. -d)  The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. -e) All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time.  This experiment was first performed by} -a)  Newton in 1704. +b)  Taylor in 1909. -c)  Aspect in 1982. -d) Young in 1801. -e)  Davisson and Germer in 1925. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a) true +b)  false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a) true -b)  false

Wave particle duality quiz version X
{The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a) Heisenberg in 1925. -b)   Taylor in 1909. -c) Schroedinger in 1926. -d)  Newton in 1704. +e) Young in 1801. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a)  true +b) false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a)  true -b) false {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time.  This experiment was first performed by} -a)  Newton in 1704. -b) Aspect in 1982. +c)   Taylor in 1909. -d) Young in 1801. -e)  Davisson and Germer in 1925. {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a) All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. +b)  Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -c) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. -d)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. -e) The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a)  true -b) false {The (wave) second  segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a)  true -b) false {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin.  The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty.  To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly.  A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ +c)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv. This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a) By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. -b)  By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. -c) If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. +d)  While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a) true +b)  false

Wave particle duality quiz version Y
{The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a) true -b)  false {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} +a)  Taylor in 1909. -b)  Aspect in 1982. -c) Davisson and Germer in 1925. -d)  Newton in 1704. -e) Young in 1801. {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} -a)  Newton in 1704. -b)  Taylor in 1909. -c)  Schroedinger in 1926. +d) Young in 1801. -e)  Heisenberg in 1925. {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin. The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty. To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly. A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } -a)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ +b)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -c)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -d)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ {The (wave) second  segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a) true -b)  false {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a) true -b)  false {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} -a) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. +b)  Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -c) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. -d)  All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. -e) The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv.  This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a)  By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. -b) By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit. +c)  While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -d) If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a)  true +b) false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a)  true +b) false

Wave particle duality quiz version Z
{The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because particles are never observed to exhibit diffraction.} -a) true +b)  false {A "spooky" variation of the third (quantum) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv occurs when the signal is so weak that only one particle is usually near the slit at any given time. This experiment was first performed by} -a) Aspect in 1982. +b)   Taylor in 1909. -c) Young in 1801. -d)  Newton in 1704. -e) Davisson and Germer in 1925. {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently narrow.} +a)  true -b) false {The second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv depicts a two slit diffraction pattern that is modeled by a formula put forth by} +a)  Young in 1801. -b) Heisenberg in 1925. -c)   Taylor in 1909. -d) Schroedinger in 1926. -e)  Newton in 1704. {An understanding of the diffraction pattern associated with particles is based on} +a) Interference between the component of the wave from each slit. -b)  All of these nearly equivalent models explain diffraction. -c) The fact that particles can make glancing collisions with the edge of a slit. -d)  Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert between pairs of particles. -e) Forces that the De Broglie pilot wave exert on individual particles. {A dead "fly" of mass $$m$$ is placed in a dark gravity-free vacuum, somewhere not too far from the origin.  The speed of the fly is known to be zero with virtually zero uncertainty.  To ascertain the fly's position you construct "flyswatter" that can detect any collision between the flyswatter" and fly.  A small hole of radius $$\Delta x$$ in the center of the flyswatter will inform you of whether a collision took place.  The uncertainty in the fly's position is $$\Delta x$$ if the fly passed through the hole.  The fly's (non-relativistic) speed is now unknown but estimated to be zero with an uncertainty that can be calculated from: } +a)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -b)  $$ m\Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ -c)  $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \geq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ -d) $$ \Delta v \cdot \Delta x \leq \frac{m\hbar}{2}$$ {Observe the second (wave) segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv and note the rapid divergence of the wave at each of the two slits (better seen here). This occurs because significant single slit diffraction occurs for a slit that is sufficiently wide.} -a)  true +b) false {The (wave) second  segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv is based on the fact that the two waves emanating from the two slits can interfere with each other.} +a)  true -b) false {The first (particle) segment in Wave-particle duality.ogv does not depict a diffraction pattern when particles impinge upon two slits because classical (Newtonian) physics fails to predict such diffraction.} +a)  true -b) false {An observer is present is the fourth segment of Wave-particle duality.ogv.  This observer disrupts the diffraction pattern because:} -a)  If Heisenberg's microscope is used to ascertain which slit has the particle, the wavelength required to obtain sufficient resolution implies that the photons have sufficient individual momentum to "kick" the particle out of its original path. +b) While all of these arguments have been used, the validity of some are "uncertain"(pun intended). -c)  By the uncertainty principle, knowing that the particle is near one slit constitutes a measurement that causes uncertainty in the particle's future motion. -d) By the Copenhagen interpretation, knowing that the particle is in one slit destroys the wavefunction at the other slit.