The Double-Slit Experiment, Rewritten in the Language of the Ledger
- Fellow Traveler

- 3 days ago
- 5 min read
If there is a single experiment that reveals both the elegance and the strangeness of nature, it is the double slit. Physicists have called it everything from “the central mystery” to “science’s impossible cathedral.” It is the rare device that can look classical in the morning and quantum by nightfall—depending only on how you ask your question.
To me, it offers something more: a clean place to show how the Ledger Model reframes quantum mechanics without rewriting any of its math. The phenomenon remains the same. The equations remain the same. But the story—the information story—becomes clearer.
The Setup (Where Both Languages Agree)
We send particles—photons, electrons, whatever—toward a barrier with two narrow slits. Behind the slits is a screen that records the landing positions.
Here is the puzzle that has taunted generations:
Send the particles one at a time, carefully, slowly.
They still build up an interference pattern—a map of alternating bright and dark bands.
Yet each particle hits the screen at a single point.
How does a single particle behave as though it traveled through both slits, while leaving a dot as if it traveled through only one?
This is the right question. It’s just that classical language has a hard time answering it cleanly.
The Classical (Copenhagen) Account
Physics textbooks will tell you something like this:
A particle is described by a wave function, ψ.
ψ evolves smoothly according to the Schrödinger equation.
When the particle encounters the two slits, ψ splits: part goes through one slit, part through the other.
These parts interfere—constructively in some places, destructively in others.
When the particle hits the detector, ψ “collapses,” and the particle is found at a definite position.
This works. The predictions match experiment to ridiculous precision. But conceptually, the story leaves a few loose ends:
What is ψ? A real wave? A belief? A calculational trick?
What counts as a “measurement” that triggers collapse?
Why does observing which slit the particle uses destroy interference?
How can a single particle “interfere with itself”?
Copenhagen’s answer is usually: “That’s just how Nature works.”
Accurate, yes—but not deeply satisfying.
The Ledger Model Version
The Ledger Model doesn’t modify a single equation. It simply reframes what those equations mean in terms of information: what is possible, what is selected, and what becomes irreversible.
In Ledger terms, the double slit is a three-act play: Draft → Vote → Ink.
Act I: The Draft
Before detection, the particle exists in the Draft—a space of physically valid possibilities that quantum mechanics allows but that have not yet become facts.
The Draft is not a mystical fog. It is the realm in which:
The wave function evolves unitarily
No information has been irreversibly recorded
No thermodynamic price has been paid
Multiple paths coexist because none have yet been committed
Through both slits, the Draft naturally encodes all the allowed paths. The “left slit” and “right slit” branches are simply components of ψ that have not yet been pruned by interaction with the environment.
Interference, in this language, is not a particle “being in two places.” It is the mathematics of possibility—what happens when nothing has forced the universe to choose.
In the Ledger view, interference is what Draft Mode looks like when you make it visible.
Act II: The Vote
When the particle reaches the detection screen, everything changes.
The screen—made of trillions of interacting atoms—is an extraordinarily efficient environmental auditor.
It does not merely “observe.”
It interacts. It entangles.
It decoheres.
It suppresses fragile quantum branches that cannot survive the scrutiny of so many degrees of freedom.
This is the Vote.
A Vote is not a single decisive moment. It is the gradual but ferociously fast process by which the environment selects stable, classical outcomes—what Wojciech Zurek calls pointer states. These are the configurations that continue to propagate reliably through the world’s messy, thermal bath.
And crucially: A Vote has a thermodynamic cost.
Decoherence is not free. Selecting one outcome over many requires the environment to absorb information—an echo of Landauer’s principle, which tells us that resolving uncertainty requires energy dissipation.
The Vote narrows the Draft. It prunes possibilities. It selects a consistent classical outcome.
Act III: The Ink
When the detector records a dot, the story leaves the Draft entirely. The outcome becomes Ink—an irreversible entry in the classical Ledger of the world.
Ink is entropy.
Not metaphorical entropy. Literal thermodynamic entropy, dissipated by the detector as heat—the physical cost of collapsing a universe of possibilities into a single committed fact.
Nothing “mystical” disappears. Unchosen Draft branches were never facts. They were possible histories that failed the Vote.
The dot you see is the only branch that paid the thermodynamic price to exist.
Entropy is the receipt proving that uncertainty was resolved.
Side-by-Side: Classical vs Ledger
Concept | Classical Definition | Ledger Interpretation |
Wave Function | Mathematical object encoding probabilities | The Draft: the set of uncommitted possibilities |
Superposition | “Particle is in both states” | Multiple allowable Draft entries coexist; no commitment yet |
Interference | Amplitude addition & cancellation | Draft branches overlap because none have been Voted |
Measurement | Special event causing collapse | The Vote: decoherence selecting pointer states |
Collapse | Primitive postulate | Vote → Ink: selection + thermodynamic cost |
Definite Outcome | Random sample | A single branch gets Inked; the rest remain unwritten |
Detector Heat | Irrelevant noise | The Ink, the thermodynamic receipt |
Why Which-Path Detection Kills Interference
Classical account: “Measuring which slit the particle went through disturbs the system.”
Ledger account: Which-path detection is an early Vote.
If a detector records “left slit,” even partially:
you have already written a Ledger entry
the Draft is pruned
the “right slit” possibility is no longer available
there is nothing left for interference to be
Interference does not disappear because the particle “knows it’s being watched.”It disappears because you spent your Write-Budget early.
Once a fact is written to the Ledger, you cannot un-write it.
The Quantum Eraser (A Subtle but Clean Ledger Explanation)
The quantum eraser looks paradoxical only in classical language. It appears as though you can “erase” which-path information after detection and resurrect interference.
Ledger interpretation:
The which-path information was never Inked—only stored in a Draft-like entangled state.
“Erasing” is a unitary operation, which is reversible and thermodynamically free.
No Ledger entry is modified; none is un-written.
When you correlate results properly, you discover the interference hidden inside subsets of outcomes.
No retrocausality.
No messages to the past.
Just careful bookkeeping of what was committed vs. what remained in Draft.
What the Ledger Adds
The Ledger Model doesn’t reinvent quantum mechanics.It gives it a coherent informational story:
Measurement is no longer primitive; it is decoherence—the Vote.
Irreversibility is no longer mysterious; entropy is the Ink.
The classical world is the accumulation of committed entries.
The quantum world is the realm of possibilities before commitment.
The double slit is the rare place where we can see both modes at once.
You can watch Draft Mode interfere. You can watch Ledger Mode accumulate dots. And you can watch the universe pick one out of many possible futures—at a measurable thermodynamic cost.
What we call “mystery” is often just the universe revealing its information-processing rules.
Summary
In Ledger language:
The interference pattern is the Draft.
Each dot is Ink.
The transition between them is the Vote.
Same physics.
Same predictions.
But a cleaner narrative:
Reality is what remains after the universe pays the cost of deciding.
This is the Ledger of the Real in action.
The Ledger of Tetris: How a Falling Puzzle Teaches Us How Reality Writes Itself
Classic Solutions vs Ledger
Why a Hot Cup of Coffee Cools — In Classical Physics vs. the Ledger Model
The Double-Slit Experiment, Rewritten in the Language of the Ledger
Time Dilation: Classical Geometry vs. the Ledger’s Economy of Time
Why Two Charges Repel: Classical Electrostatics Through the Lens of the Ledger

Comments