Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:0908.1032 · Physica E Low-dimensional Systems and Nanostructures

Coexistence of full which-path information and interference in Wheeler's delayed-choice experiment with photons

Kristel F. L. Michielsen, Shengjun Yuan, Shuang Zhao, Fengping Jin, Hans A. De Raedt

Published Jun 25, 2009• 13 citations
arXivHTMLPDF
DOI
10.1016/j.physe.2009.06.072

Related papers

Realization of quantum Wheeler's delayed-choice experiment

Jian‐Shun Tang, Yulong Li, Xiao‐Ye Xu +3 more

Nature Photonics•Aug 17, 2012•134 citations

From Einstein's LichtQuanten to Wheeler's delayed choice experiment: wave-particle duality for a single photon

Alain Aspect

•Dec 6, 2009•0 citations

Wheeler thought experiment with delayed choice

Jeffrey H. Boyd

Bulletin of the American Physical Society•Feb 28, 2012•0 citations

Wheeler's Delayed-Choice Experiment as an

YOUNG HO GOH

Wheeler's delayed-choice experiment appears to show that a choice made now retroactively determines whether a photon behaved as a wave or particle in the past — even billions of years ago in the cosmic version. This has been interpreted as evidence for retrocausality, the role of consciousness in collapsing the wave function, or the many-worlds interpretation. We show that none of these interpretations is required. In the information processing load framework established in Papers 4 and 7, the photon propagates with n ≈ 0 environmental interactions throughout its journey. Since n = 0 < n* for all physical photons, the condition C_wave < C_particle holds: the wave state is maintained for the entire propagation duration, regardless of whether that duration is nanoseconds or 10 Gyr. The experimenter's detector setting determines only n_detector at the moment of detection — not the photon's state during propagation. The interference visibility function is V = max(0, 1 − n_detector/n*): full interference when n_detector = 0, no interference when n_detector ≥ n*. We verify numerically that a photon from a quasar 10 Gly distant accumulates n ≈ 2.6 × 10⁶ CMB scatterings during propagation, while n* ≈ 82 for a 500 nm photon — confirming n << n* and wave state maintenance. The apparent retrocausality is a consequence of a misidentification: the question 'which path did the photon take during propagation?' presupposes a definite path during propagation, but in the load framework the photon was not in a path-definite state. There is no fact of the matter about the path during propagation. The detector choice at detection determines what question can meaningfully be asked — not what happened in the past.Wheeler's delayed-choice experiment appears to show that a choice made now retroactively determines whether a photon behaved as a wave or particle in the past — even billions of years ago in the cosmic version. This has been interpreted as evidence for retrocausality, the role of consciousness in collapsing the wave function, or the many-worlds interpretation. We show that none of these interpretations is required. In the information processing load framework established in Papers 4 and 7, the photon propagates with n ≈ 0 environmental interactions throughout its journey. Since n = 0 < n* for all physical photons, the condition C_wave < C_particle holds: the wave state is maintained for the entire propagation duration, regardless of whether that duration is nanoseconds or 10 Gyr. The experimenter's detector setting determines only n_detector at the moment of detection — not the photon's state during propagation. The interference visibility function is V = max(0, 1 − n_detector/n*): full interference when n_detector = 0, no interference when n_detector ≥ n*. We verify numerically that a photon from a quasar 10 Gly distant accumulates n ≈ 2.6 × 10⁶ CMB scatterings during propagation, while n* ≈ 82 for a 500 nm photon — confirming n << n* and wave state maintenance. The apparent retrocausality is a consequence of a misidentification: the question 'which path did the photon take during propagation?' presupposes a definite path during propagation, but in the load framework the photon was not in a path-definite state. There is no fact of the matter about the path during propagation. The detector choice at detection determines what question can meaningfully be asked — not what happened in the past. Keywords: delayed-choice experiment; Wheeler; retrocausality; information processing load; wave function collapse; quantum eraser; cosmic photon; weak measurement; n < n*; no consciousness required

•Apr 2, 2026•0 citations

Experimental Realization of Wheeler's Delayed-Choice Gedanken Experiment

V. Jacques, E Wu, Frédéric Grosshans +4 more

Wave-particle duality is strikingly illustrated by Wheeler's delayed-choice gedanken experiment, where the configuration of a two-path interferometer is chosen after a single-photon pulse has entered it: Either the interferometer is closed (that is, the two paths are recombined) and the interference is observed, or the interferometer remains open and the path followed by the photon is measured. We report an almost ideal realization of that gedanken experiment with single photons allowing unambiguous which-way measurements. The choice between open and closed configurations, made by a quantum random number generator, is relativistically separated from the entry of the photon into the interferometer.

arXiv:quant-ph/0610241•Science•Feb 15, 2007•569 citations

A quantum potential approach to the Wheeler delayed-choice experiment

David Böhm, Christopher Dewdney, Basil J. Hiley

Nature•May 1, 1985•37 citations
Wheeler's delayed-choice experiment appears to show that a choice made now retroactively determines whether a photon behaved as a wave or particle in the past — even billions of years ago in the cosmic version. This has been interpreted as evidence for retrocausality, the role of consciousness in collapsing the wave function, or the many-worlds interpretation. We show that none of these interpretations is required. In the information processing load framework established in Papers 4 and 7, the photon propagates with n ≈ 0 environmental interactions throughout its journey. Since n = 0 < n* for all physical photons, the condition C_wave < C_particle holds: the wave state is maintained for the entire propagation duration, regardless of whether that duration is nanoseconds or 10 Gyr. The experimenter's detector setting determines only n_detector at the moment of detection — not the photon's state during propagation. The interference visibility function is V = max(0, 1 − n_detector/n*): full interference when n_detector = 0, no interference when n_detector ≥ n*. We verify numerically that a photon from a quasar 10 Gly distant accumulates n ≈ 2.6 × 10⁶ CMB scatterings during propagation, while n* ≈ 82 for a 500 nm photon — confirming n << n* and wave state maintenance. The apparent retrocausality is a consequence of a misidentification: the question 'which path did the photon take during propagation?' presupposes a definite path during propagation, but in the load framework the photon was not in a path-definite state. There is no fact of the matter about the path during propagation. The detector choice at detection determines what question can meaningfully be asked — not what happened in the past.Wheeler's delayed-choice experiment appears to show that a choice made now retroactively determines whether a photon behaved as a wave or particle in the past — even billions of years ago in the cosmic version. This has been interpreted as evidence for retrocausality, the role of consciousness in collapsing the wave function, or the many-worlds interpretation. We show that none of these interpretations is required. In the information processing load framework established in Papers 4 and 7, the photon propagates with n ≈ 0 environmental interactions throughout its journey. Since n = 0 < n* for all physical photons, the condition C_wave < C_particle holds: the wave state is maintained for the entire propagation duration, regardless of whether that duration is nanoseconds or 10 Gyr. The experimenter's detector setting determines only n_detector at the moment of detection — not the photon's state during propagation. The interference visibility function is V = max(0, 1 − n_detector/n*): full interference when n_detector = 0, no interference when n_detector ≥ n*. We verify numerically that a photon from a quasar 10 Gly distant accumulates n ≈ 2.6 × 10⁶ CMB scatterings during propagation, while n* ≈ 82 for a 500 nm photon — confirming n << n* and wave state maintenance. The apparent retrocausality is a consequence of a misidentification: the question 'which path did the photon take during propagation?' presupposes a definite path during propagation, but in the load framework the photon was not in a path-definite state. There is no fact of the matter about the path during propagation. The detector choice at detection determines what question can meaningfully be asked — not what happened in the past. Keywords: delayed-choice experiment; Wheeler; retrocausality; information processing load; wave function collapse; quantum eraser; cosmic photon; weak measurement; n < n*; no consciousness required
Wave-particle duality is strikingly illustrated by Wheeler's delayed-choice gedanken experiment, where the configuration of a two-path interferometer is chosen after a single-photon pulse has entered it: Either the interferometer is closed (that is, the two paths are recombined) and the interference is observed, or the interferometer remains open and the path followed by the photon is measured. We report an almost ideal realization of that gedanken experiment with single photons allowing unambiguous which-way measurements. The choice between open and closed configurations, made by a quantum random number generator, is relativistically separated from the entry of the photon into the interferometer.