Zachary Roberts 1

Abstract
This experiment was an attempt to investigate Youngs Double Slit Experiment in light of the
modern theory of light as particles. The results of our experiment indicate that the interference
pattern appears as a probability distribution of intensity obeying the behavior of a Gaussian bell
curve, which indicates that light particles have a certain probability of hitting at a certain
maximum. Our results also rigidly confirm the wave theory of light, therefore indicating that
light shares in a wave and a particle nature.

Zachary Roberts 2
Introduction
Thomas Young was a British physicist in the late 18th and early 19th century. A great deal
of his work was related to optics and the nature of light. During his time the predominant theory
of light came from Isaac Newton, who proposed in his work Opticks, that light was made of
discrete particles named corpuscles. The opposing and markedly less popular theory at the
time came from the Dutch physicist Christiaan Huygens, a contemporary of Newton, who
proposed that light had a wave nature rather than a particle nature. To test these theories, Young
devised an experiment, in which he would send light from the same source through two slits and
onto a screen a fixed distance away from the slits, and watch the pattern that would emerge. The
classical expectation would be that if light were a particle, then the pattern apparent on the back
screen would be simply two bright fringes where all of the particles would hit. For light as a
wave the expectation would be that an interference pattern would appear on the back screen. The
analogy often used to describe this phenomenon is waves on the surface of water. When there are
two surface waves of the same frequency propagating in phase with one another, it can be shown
that when two peaks from the waves meet, there will be constructive interference. Inversely
when a peak meets a trough, there will be destructive interference. This phenomenon is pictured
in the graphic below:

Zachary Roberts 3
After a series of trials Young confirmed that the wavelike interference pattern did appear
on the back screen, and thus concluded that light had a wave nature. This was a profound change
in physics, as the wave nature of light was the predominant understanding for the following
century. For physics this was a wonderful discovery, as a plethora of ideas slowly became
explained with the wave theory as its basis. Most notably, The Scottish mathematical physicist
James Clerk Maxwell joined four fundamental equations, named Maxwells equations, governing
the propagation of electromagnetic waves, otherwise known as light. Maxwells equations
became the cornerstone of electromagnetism, and the theory of light was considered finished
work. The theory of light as a wave remained largely unquestioned for quite some time. It wasnt
until Albert Einsteins work on the photoelectric effect that the wave theory of light was drawn
back into question. The photoelectric effect showed that the energy of a light wave was not
related to its intensity, but rather its frequency. The experiments surrounding the idea of the
photoelectric effect reestablished the idea of light having a particle nature. This idea also earned
Einstein his Nobel Prize. Nonetheless, the establishment of the idea of the particle nature of light
drew up some very interesting debate on the matter. Was it a wave or a particle? Further
experimentation would verify, quite strangely, that light had the nature of both waves and
particles. This is the very idea that our experiment seeks to understand.
In light of the above-mentioned ideas, revisiting the double slit experiment could provide
some very interesting results. If light does indeed have a particle nature, how then would it make
sense that an interference pattern would emerge? One explanation is that photons moving
through the slits simultaneously will interfere with one another, causing the patent interference
pattern repeatedly observed in this experiment. To rule out this possibility, we used a device that
exploits the particle nature of light. This device provides the energy required to eject photons one

Zachary Roberts 4
at a time. After removing as much ambient light as possible, we can ensure that one photon at a
time will pass through the slits, and hit the screen. The screen on the device is equipped with a
photodiode, so that when light hits it, a potential is generated. This way we can measure the
points where the photons are hitting most frequently by measuring the points of highest potential.

The equations used to explain the double slit interference can be derived from the below
image:

Zachary Roberts 5
Given that d is the distance between the slits, L is the distance to the screen, is the
angle between the maxima, y is the distance between the maxima, and n though not pictured
above is the amount of peaks away from the center maximum, the following relationships prove
to be true:

d sin=n

y
=tan 1 [ ]
L

Equation 1
Equation 2

Analysis
The graph representing our measured Potential versus our measured position, as
compared to an ideal interference curve is pictured below:

Voltage vs. Position

Zachary Roberts 6

Though our experimental curve may not be ideal, there are some peak values worth
examining. When we consider the position of our peak values we can determine our lights
wavelength, which we observed to be on the red end of the spectrum. The table of calculated
wavelengths is below, with a graphic of the visible EM spectrum:
Peaks
Distanc Voltag

e
e
y
(radians)
(Degrees) n
0.00445
0
1.94
0.00380
0.0006 0.001299
0.074484
0
1.65
50
999
471
0.00300
0.0014 0.002899
0.166157
0
1.02
50
992
295
0.00230
0.0021 0.004299
0.246370
0
0.41
50
973
333
0.00540
0.0009 0.001899
0.108861
0
0.48
50
998
85
0.00580
0.0013 0.002699
0.154698
0
1.04
50
993
229
0.00645
0.0020 0.003999
0.229181
0
0.41
00
979
896
0.00720
0.0034 0.006799
0.389605
0
0.09
00
895
296
0.00770
0.0047 0.009399
0.538564
0
0.05
00
723
465
Average
(m)

(m)

1
2
3
1
2
3
4
5

5.94359E07
6.62937E07
6.55314E07
8.68678E07
6.17218E07
6.09595E07
7.77222E07
8.59498E07
7.05603E07

Zachary Roberts 7
Average
(nm)

Uncertainty
(radians)

(m)

1.37232E-05

4.61046E09
2.38016E09
1.65888E09
4.65377E09
2.36783E09
1.64136E09
1.38213E09
1.2548E09

Average uncertainty
(m)
Average uncertainty
(nm)

2.49367E09
2.493672
203

1.00841E-05
1.04119E-05
1.08851E-05
1.01789E-05
1.0358E-05
1.07702E-05
1.20924E-05

705.60275
2

Zachary Roberts 8

Comparing our results with the EM spectrum graphic, we can confirm that our calculated
wavelength for red light is correct, and is therefore compatible with the wave theory regarding
the double slit experiment.
This however, is not the only outstanding result. It appears that the intensity of the
maxima behaves according to the Gaussian bell curve, which generally represents event
probability distribution. Using our maxima, we generated a curve as compared to an ideal
Gaussian bell curve pictured in the graphic below:

Zachary Roberts 9

Given that these two graphs are virtually identical, it would appear that we are dealing
with a probability distribution. This would not be the case for a wave interference pattern alone.
This is a particularly strange result given that the pattern emerges from one photon at a time
encountering the back screen. This rules out particle-particle interference. These results indicate
that the photon is interfering with itself, a very strange result. Since we are dealing with a
distribution, it would seem that the likelihood of a photon hitting a maxima obeys the behavior of
the Gaussian curve governing the intensity at each maximum.

Conclusion
However strange it might be, our results show that light behaves as both a particle and a
wave. This means that the classical understanding remains true, and exists in conjunction with
the modern understanding. These results are incredibly consistent with current ideas regarding
the nature of light. Though we are not the first to try this experiment, it serves to support the
monumental conclusions of the modern theory of light. Given another attempt at this experiment,
I would conduct trials with a single slit, and take more measurements altogether to better see the
probability distribution evident in our results.

Zachary Roberts 10
Works Cited
http://www.stopdown.net/myjpeg/interference1.gif
https://root.cern.ch/download/doc/primer/figures/TF1_DoubleSlit.png
Information on Thomas Young
http://www.britannica.com/biography/Thomas-Young
http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200805/physicshistory.cfm