Could we imagine an optic system that would allow us to look at a double-slit experiment taking place kilometers away, let's say on the moon?

For example, an astronaut would flight to the moon with an atomic clock and a somehow big enough double-slit set up. He would land on the moon, position his equipment down and set up the Young's experiment.
Then he would do the standard experience : turn the recorder off, and observe there is a wave pattern on the screen; turn the recorder on, and observe the wave pattern collapse and become two rays of light, and so on. Let's assume he checks the time on his atomic clock every time the event occurs.

Let's imagine we add an observer from earth. He would have a giant telescope pointed at the same screen on the moon, and an atomic clock synchronised with the one on the moon. He should be able to see the results of the recorder being switched on and off by his colleague, and he should also be able to check the time of this event on his atomic clock left on earth accordingly.

Let's also imagine that this observer from earth has a remote switch to control the recorders on the moon as well. He and his colleague would follow a common schedule in order to know who is supposed to control the switch when, who is supposed to look at the screen when etc. Let's assume that this schedule covers all of the possible combination of observing/recording/controlling the switch for both observers.

Now, using the synchronicity of the two clocks and the description of the observations of both experiencers, and using the fact that we know that light takes ~1.3s to travel from the moon to the earth, could we end-up observing with "a naked eye" the wave function of the photons collapsing faster than the speed of light?

NOTE : I have absolutely no idea of the feasibility of this experiment. I never observed a double-slit experience by myself, so I am still very confused about the influence of the recorders and the influece of the observer's eye watching the screen on the wave function's collapse. Also I am not a cosmologist, therefore I don't know if we can aquire an image stable enough in order to see the screen precisely at such a big distance. Therefore, i consider this more as an experience of thoughts rather than a proper physic experience.

The moment the information comes into this reality frame in the universe at large is when the wave function is collapsed, another words whose ever conscious awareness measures the photons or any other form of matter and that data becomes available (wave function is collapsed), and then from that moment on it is in this reality, and then to abide by the rule set. Time has nothing to do with it other than a point of reference of when it was (measured) observed. The double slit i think takes a lot of time with being very open minded to understand, i have been studding this for years and have found Tom to give the best detailed description of how this works. At every lecture he talks about it, some more detailed than others listen and watch some of these videos for the best description i have came across. Sabby

Tom's model explains and derives what Sabby just said.
The metaphor used is that of a virtual reality like we know it from computer games for instance.

Whether there is a particle or not is fundamentally and only about the availability of information.

There is neighter waves nor particles, there is no screen and no physical observer - everything physical is "virtual".

It does take some time to grasp the double slit experiments.
This here is helpful information.
There is more useful info at that site when you are done with the above ;)

Some ways to express it:

A tree falls in a woods and there is noone there to hear it. Did it make a sound?
The answer from the virtual reality perspective is: no
because there is no tree ... it's just information (not available in this case)

... there is no spoon!

Try the link :)

The actual experiment is more complicated than this, Tom explains it in detail in the Calgary workshop: http://youtu.be/2Nlbro2MNBs
The whole point of the experiment is about information being available in this reality, too many people misunderstand it and put too much emphasis on "conscious awareness observing", that is totally secondary to how the experiment relates to information.
Hopefully, the Calgary video will help your confusion about it :)

Well, thanks to all for your responses. Actually, I am now more confused about this experiment than I was before, but I guess it is only a detail of the bigger picture described in Tom's work.
I'll let this experiment and it's possible derivations to phycisits for now on, and keep on reading the book, that will be enlightening for sure.

ots,

I think that Tom has provided the simplification and key to this and other such questions. You have no doubt heard the phrase 'follow the money' in terms of dealing with politics and what politicians do. In this case, you 'follow the information'. What is maintained as consistency here in PMR is based upon what information is available and maintained. So in understanding or predicting what happens in a physics experiment related to a double slit type system, the observed pattern depends upon what information is available here within PMR. If it is not known what slit a particle, electron or photon passed through, the only information then available is the probability, at least in the sense that there is a probability and not a certainty, and so you get a resulting interference pattern. If it is known which slit the particle passed through, then you get a point pattern behind the slit or slits through which the particle passed. Lose the information from PMR in some way and the pattern reverts to a probability interference fringe pattern. Follow the information and you can define the behavior.

This was previously interpreted in terms of observation by a consciousness but that caused some problems. It comes out more clearly based upon Tom's concept of what information is available.

See if this helps any to clarify your confusion. I had thought, actually know, that there are others better qualified than I to delve into this kind of physics problem and left it to them to respond but since you say you are worse confused now than before, I apparently cannot make it any worse by sticking my oar in the water.

Ted

I like the challenge of explaining complex things simply so here's a stab at it.

Any event is only a potential event until data is taken or a measurement or observation is made.

At this point a sample of all the possible events in that scenario is taken and becomes manifest data.

In the double-slit experiment a particle could go through one of two slits. Until a particle is detected no particles manifest, so you get the wave distribution.

When a particle is detected it creates the event of a particle going through one of the slits.

Once an event has been created then further data and observations will be consistent with this.

_________________
________________

"There are some ideas so wrong that only a very intelligent person could believe in them"
George Orwell