from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Edition
- n. One that detects, especially a mechanical, electrical, or chemical device that automatically identifies and records or registers a stimulus, such as an environmental change in pressure or temperature, an electric signal, or radiation from a radioactive material.
from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License
- n. A device capable of registering a specific substance or physical phenomenon.
from the GNU version of the Collaborative International Dictionary of English
- n. One who, or that which, detects; a detecter.
- n. An indicator showing the depth of the water in a boiler.
- n. A galvanometer, usually portable, for indicating the direction of a current.
- n. Any of various devices for detecting the presence of electric waves.
from The Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia
- n. One who or that which detects or brings to light; one who finds out what another attempts to conceal; a revealer; a discoverer.
- n. An instrument or a device for indicating the presence or state of a thing.
- n. Sometimes written detecter.
from WordNet 3.0 Copyright 2006 by Princeton University. All rights reserved.
- n. electronic equipment that detects the presence of radio signals or radioactivity
- n. any device that receives a signal or stimulus (as heat or pressure or light or motion etc.) and responds to it in a distinctive manner
- n. rectifier that extracts modulation from a radio carrier wave
Instead of wave functions we could talk about this; that if a source of a certain kind emits a particle, and a detector is there to receive it, we can give the amplitude that the source will emit and the detector receive.
Repeated studies (such as by the National Academy of Science) has shown that the "lie detector" is no more accurate than dunking "witches" used to be.
If your smoke detector is more than ten years old, replace it; same thing for any carbon monoxide detector more than five years old.
But I don't doubt that what Sofie said also applies in my case: my bullshit detector is likely better honed towards fantasy than SF, and so it may be that I avoid the more trite examples of the former, but pick up more of the latter.
If detectors 1 or 2 do the detecting then the which-path information has been "erased" and the main detector shows a wave-like interference pattern.
Generally, there is a main detector for the signal photon to check for interference patterns and three detectors (a fourth detector is implied) to detect an entangled twin photon.
Which detector is used to measure the twin photon is left up to quantum chance.
* I generally find my detector is quite accurate; however, it has no ability to detect if the good story is well executed.
A Denver TSA employee who brought a handgun to the airport and passed it around the metal detector is still on the job.
Your hand-held miniaturized rapid-acting virus detector is ready.