In this paper is presented a simple alternative model of the dual nature of light, based on the deliberate inversion of the original statement from P. A. M. Dirac: "Each photon interferes only with itself. Interference between different photons never occurs." Such an inversion implies that photons and light quanta are considered as different classes of objects, but stays apparently compatible with results reported from different recent experiments. A Gedanken experiment having the potential capacity to test the proposed model in single photon regime is described, and its possible outcomes are discussed. The proposed setup could also be utilized to assess the modern interpretation of the principle of complementarity.
In this paper is presented a simple alternative model of the dual nature of light, based on the deliberate inversion of the original statement from P. A. M. Dirac: "Each photon interferes only with itself. Interference between different photons never occurs." Such an inversion implies that photons and light quanta are considered as different classes of objects, but stays apparently compatible with results reported from different recent experiments. A Gedanken experiment having the potential capacity to test the proposed model in single photon regime is described, and its possible outcomes are discussed. The proposed setup could also be utilized to assess the modern interpretation of the principle of complementarity.
In his famous book, The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, Dirac stated that “... photon ... interferes only with itself. Interference between two different photons never occurs.” However, two-photon interference has been demonstrated experimentally. Was Dirac wrong? We report an new experiment in this paper. It demonstrated that two-photon interference can not be considered the interference of two photons. “Two-photon” is not two photons. Two-photon is a single entity, which is just like a photon. We may call it biphoton. Dirac was correct. Biphoton interferes only with itself.
Light can interfere like a wave in a multi-path experiment, but it also has particle properties when interacting with matter. In a closer look, the interference pattern is created by many individual detections ("clicks"), which do not all occur simultaneously. An established assumption is therefore that a single light particle is capable of interfering with itself by superimposing all possibilities to get from the source to the detector. This is in stark contrast to our experience with macroscopic objects, which always "decide" in favour of only one of the alternative paths.In 2010, Jin et al. (Ref. 15) described an event-based model which allowed the authors to show that an interference pattern consisting of clicks can arise in a multi-path experiment even if photons, like macroscopic objects, only follow one path. To do this, photons must be able to transmit the information about their travelling duration to the detector and the detector must have a basic memory. A threshold function uses the message of several light quanta to decide whether a single detection is initiated, which is not the evidence for a single photon. In this "proof of principle", the authors do not claim that the detector function is a realistic one.In the present paper, this detector is replaced by a material consisting of ionizable molecules whose interaction with light takes place according to a modified version of Einstein's radiation laws. Based on this, a photon pair interaction mediated by matter takes place, which in a multi-path experiment generates an interference pattern of clicks at the detector, even if an arbitrary amount of time elapses between the individual detections. In the present model an interference pattern with minima that have less than half the intensity of the maxima is the result of a peculiar behaviour of the detector: In this case, the entirety of its electrons must be described as a unit (a “field”) with many equidistant energy levels. The results of a simulation are presented which enable the model to be tested in experiments.
Light can interfere like a wave in a multi-path experiment, but it also has particle properties when interacting with matter. In a closer look, the interference pattern is created by many individual detections ("clicks"), which do not all occur simultaneously. An established assumption is therefore that a single light particle is capable of interfering with itself by superimposing all possibilities to get from the source to the detector. This is in stark contrast to our experience with macroscopic objects, which always "decide" in favour of only one of the alternative paths.In 2010, Jin et al. (Ref. 15) described an event-based model which allowed the authors to show that an interference pattern consisting of clicks can arise in a multi-path experiment even if photons, like macroscopic objects, only follow one path. To do this, photons must be able to transmit the information about their travelling duration to the detector and the detector must have a basic memory. A threshold function uses the message of several light quanta to decide whether a single detection is initiated, which is not the evidence for a single photon. In this "proof of principle", the authors do not claim that the detector function is a realistic one.In the present paper, this detector is replaced by a material consisting of ionizable molecules whose interaction with light takes place according to a modified version of Einstein's radiation laws. Based on this, a photon pair interaction mediated by matter takes place, which in a multi-path experiment generates an interference pattern of clicks at the detector, even if an arbitrary amount of time elapses between the individual detections. In the present model an interference pattern with minima that have less than half the intensity of the maxima is the result of a peculiar behaviour of the detector: In this case, the entirety of its electrons must be described as a unit (a “field”) with many equidistant energy levels. The results of a simulation are presented which enable the model to be tested in experiments.
In an interesting series of articles published few years ago Afshar and coworkers [1,2] reported an optical experiment in which they claimed to refute the well known N. Bohr principle of complementarity [3, 4]. Obviously this result, if justified, would constitute a serious attack against the orthodox interpretation of quantum mechanics (known as the Copenhagen interpretation). This work stirred much debate in different journals (see for examples references [5–12]). We think however that there are still some important misunderstandings concerning the interpretation of this experiment. In a preprint written originally in 2004 [5] (and following some early discussions with Afshar) we claimed already that the interpretation by Afshar et al. can be easily stated if we stay as close as possible from the texts written by Bohr. The aim of the present article (which was initially written in 2005 to precise a bit the thought developed in [5]) is to comment the interpretation discussed in [1]. We will in the following analyze the meaning of Bohr principle and show that far from disproving its content the experiment [1] is actually a complete confirmation of its general validity. The difficulties associated with the understanding of this principle are not new and actually complementarity created troubles even in Einstein mind [3] so that we are here in good company. To summarize a bit emphatically Bohr’s complementarity we here remind that this principle states that if one of a pair of non commuting observables of a quantum object is known for sure, then information about the second (complementary) is lost [3, 4, 15, 16]. This can be equivalently expressed as a kind of duality between different descriptions of the quantum system associated with different experimental arrangements which mutually exclude each other (read in particular [3,4]). Later in the discussion we will try to precise this definition but for the moment it is enough to illustrate the concepts by examples Consider for instance the well known Young double-pinholes interference experiment made with photons. The discrete nature of light precludes the simultaneous observation of a same photon in the aperture plane and in the interference pattern: the photon cannot be absorbed twice. This is already a trivial manifestation of the principle of Bohr. Here it implies that the two statistical patterns associated with the wave in the aperture plane and its Fourier (i. e., momentum) transform require necessarily different photons for their recording. It is in that sense that each experiment excludes and completes reciprocally the other. In the case considered before the photon is absorbed during the first detection (this clearly precludes any other detection). However even a non-destructive solution for detection implying entanglement with other quantum systems has a radical effect of the same nature: the complementarity principle is still valid. For example, during their debate Bohr and Einstein [3] discussed an ideal which-way experiment in which the recoil of the slits is correlated to the motion of the photon. Momentum conservation added to arguments based on the uncertainty relations are sufficient to explain how such entanglement photon-slits can erase fringes [15–19]. It is also important for the present discussion to remind that the principle of complementarity has a perfidious consequence on the experimental meaning of trajectory and path followed by a particle. Indeed the unavoidable interactions existing between photons and detectors imply that a trajectory existing independently of any measurement process cannot be unambiguously defined. This sounds even like a tragedy when we consider once again the two-holes experiment. Indeed for Bohr this kind of experiments shows definitely the essential element of ambiguity which is involved in ascribing conventional physical attributes to quantum systems. Intuitively (i. e., from the point of view of classical particle dynamic) one would expect that a photon detected in the focal plane of the lens must have crossed only one of the hole 1 or 2 before to reach its final destination. However, if this is true, one can not intuitively understand how the presence of the second hole (through which the photon evidently did not go) forces the photon to participate to an interference pattern (which obviously needs an influence coming from both holes). Explanations to solve this paradox have been proposed by de Broglie, Bohm, and others using concepts such as empty waves or quantum potentials [20, 21]. However all these explanations are in agreement with Bohr principle (since they fully reproduce quantum predictions) and can not be experimentally distinguished. Bohr and Heisenberg proposed for all needed purposes a much more pragmatic and simpler answer: don’t bother, the complementarity principle precludes the simultaneous observation of a photon trajectory and of an interference pattern. For Bohr [3]: This point is of great logical consequence, since it is only the circumstance that we are presented with a choice of either tracing the path
It has been over 150 years since light was first considered a form of electromagnetic radiation. There is substantial evidence that the current well-established theory, that light quanta (photons) are a form of electromagnetic radiation, is incorrect. This is largely because the theory was first introduced based on assumptions not evidence. The experimental evidence, and the requirements of quantum mechanics, are largely incompatible with the existing theory and the conceptual models regarding the nature of light quanta. Several inconsistencies associated with the current belief and the associated conceptual model are identified. An entirely new and radically different conceptual model is proposed. A conceptual model that embraces what is currently known about light quanta, from both a classical and quantum-mechanical perspective. The proposed conceptual model strongly supports the Information Interpretation of quantum mechanics; a growing belief that information is a fundamental aspect of nature. Several examples of common phenomena, such as the double-slit experiment, are discussed to show how the proposed model of light quanta provides a simpler and more consistent explanation of experimental results and removes many of the apparent mysteries.
Abstract: This paper examines the Double-Slit Interference Thought Experiment to demonstrate that light quanta do not exhibit wave-particle duality under the condition that the experiment is successful. The essence of light quanta is that of pure particles. The thought experiment of light quanta undergoing double-slit interference is pivotal in proving that light quanta, along with other particles such as electrons, atoms, and macromolecules, are purely particulate in nature. In space, photons can interfere with each other's paths based on their momentum. This interference can simultaneously alter the trajectory and even the velocity of photons. That is, a photon beam with greater momentum may carry along a portion of beams with lesser momentum, propagating them over considerable distances. The wavelength of a light wave fundamentally represents the distance between consecutive photons as they queue and advance through space. A longer wavelength corresponds to a greater distance between photons, causing them to diverge more widely in space, as seen with radio waves. Conversely, a shorter wavelength implies closer proximity between photons, resulting in more tightly packed emission and a highly directional nature, as seen in gamma rays. Photons in the visible spectrum may occasionally transmit information with specific content. This information, conveyed via photons, can propagate over distances ranging from several metres to thousands of kilometres.