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:1501.00970 · Foundations of Physics

A Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Explained by the Transactional Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

H. Fearn

Published Oct 1, 2015• 6 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

This paper explains the delayed choice quantum eraser of Kim et al. (A delayed choice quantum eraser, 1999 ) in terms of the transactional interpretation (TI) of quantum mechanics by Cramer (Rev Mod Phys 58:647, 1986 , The quantum handshake, entanglement, nonlocality and transactions, 1986 ). It is kept deliberately mathematically simple to help explain the transactional technique. The emphasis is on a clear understanding of how the instantaneous “collapse” of the wave function due to a measurement at a specific time and place may be reinterpreted as a relativistically well-defined collapse over the entire path of the photon and over the entire transit time from slit to detector. This is made possible by the use of a retarded offer wave, which is thought to travel from the slits (or rather the small region within the parametric crystal where down-conversion takes place) to the detector and an advanced counter wave traveling backward in time from the detector to the slits. The point here is to make clear how simple the transactional picture is and how much more intuitive the collapse of the wave function becomes if viewed in this way. Also, any confusion about possible retro-causal signaling is put to rest. A delayed choice quantum eraser does not require any sort of backward in time communication. This paper makes the point that it is preferable to use the TI over the usual Copenhagen interpretation for a more intuitive understanding of the quantum eraser delayed choice experiment. Both methods give exactly the same end results and can be used interchangeably.

DOI
10.1007/s10701-015-9956-8

Related papers

Demystifying the delayed-choice quantum eraser

Tabish Qureshi

Abstract The delayed-choice quantum eraser has long been a subject of controversy, and has been looked at as being incomprehensible to having retro-causal effect in time. Here the delayed-choice quantum eraser is theoretically analyzed using standard quantum mechanics. Employing a Mach–Zehnder interferometer, instead of a conventional two-slit interference, brings in surprising clarity. Some common mistakes in interpreting the experiment are pointed out. It is demonstrated that in the delayed mode there is no which-way information present after the particle is registered on the screen or the final detectors, contrary to popular belief. However, it is shown that another kind of path information is present even after the particle is registered in the final detectors. The registered particle can be used to predict the results of certain yet to be made measurements on the which-way detector. This novel correlation can be tested in a careful experiment. It is consequently argued that there is no big mystery in the experiment, and no retro-causal effect whatsoever.

arXiv:1908.03920•European Journal of Physics•May 12, 2020•17 citations

Taming the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser

Johannes Fankhauser

I discuss the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment by drawing an analogy to a Bell-type measurement and giving a straightforward account in standard quantum mechanics. The delayed choice quantum eraser experiment turns out to resemble a Bell-type scenario in which the resolution of the paradox is rather trivial, and so there really is no mystery. At first glance, the experiment suggests that measurements on one part of an entangled photon pair (the idler) can be employed to control whether the measurement outcome of the other part of the photon pair (the signal) produces interference fringes at a screen after being sent through a double slit. Significantly, the choice whether there is interference or not can be made long after the signal photon encounters the screen. The results of the experiment have been alleged to invoke some sort of backwards in time influence. I argue that this issue can be eliminated by taking into proper account the role of the signal photon. Likewise, in the de Broglie–Bohm picture the trajectories of the particle can be given a well-defined description at any instant of time during the experiment. Thus, it is again clear that there is no need to resort to any kind of backwards in time influence. Quanta 2019; 8: 44-56.

arXiv:1707.07884•Quanta•Aug 11, 2019•10 citations

Entangled in Spacetime

Mohammad Rasoolinejad

This paper presents an observational analysis of the Delayed-Choice Quantum Eraser experiment through the framework of quantum mechanics. The Delayed-Choice Quantum Eraser, a variation of the classic double-slit experiment, demonstrates the intricate relationship between quantum measurement, wave-particle duality, and the temporal ordering of observations. By utilizing the principles of quantum superposition, entanglement, and the non-local collapse of the wave function, we seek to rationalize the counterintuitive outcomes observed in the experiment. Specifically, we explore how the act of measurement retroactively influences the observed behavior of particles, depending on whether or not the which-path information is available. Our analysis underscores the significance of the quantum mechanical concept of wave function collapse across spacetime, providing a deeper understanding of how quantum mechanics reconciles the delayed-choice paradox.

arXiv:2409.02354•Sep 4, 2024•0 citations

A Standard Quantum Mechanical Treatment to Rationalize the Delayed-Choice Quantum Eraser

Vipul Badhan, Pranvi, Samreet Dhillon +1 more

Ever since the proposal of delayed choice quantum erasure and subsequent realization in the experiment by Kim et al., the interpretation and implications of delayed-choice experiments have remained a subject of intense foundational debate. This paper resolves the apparent paradox attached to the experiment using standard quantum mechanics. Using an extended Mach-Zehnder interferometer which captures every operational feature of the original experiment, we show that choosing between which-path and erasure detectors is simply a choice of measurement bases, which does not rewrite a photon's past. Furthermore, by mapping the experiment to a two-way Stern-Gerlach framework, we prove that quantum erasure is an expected result of measuring entangled states, not a physical anomaly. Ultimately, through a pedagogical game, we illustrate that the illusion of retrocausality arises from asking illegitimate questions, and that a forward-in-time description is entirely sufficient to explain the logic.

quant-pharXiv:2608.02185•Aug 4, 2026•0 citations

Delayed Choice and Quantum Eraser: An Illustrated Guide Based on the Wave-or-Particle Geometric Framework

junfeng gu

The delayed-choice experiment and the quantum eraser experiment are two of the most challenging interpretive problems in quantum mechanics. Standard textbook accounts trace the presence or absence of interference to whether the experimenter "knows" the photon's path — a causal framework implying backward-in-time influence. This article offers an intuitive, diagram-rich account grounded in the wave-or-particle geometric framework, revealing that both experiments share a far simpler backbone: interference depends solely on how many waves reach a given detector. One wave → no interference. Two waves → interference. This conclusion alters no mathematical prediction of quantum mechanics; it merely flips the causal arrow from "knowing the path destroys interference" to "the number of waves creates interference." A forthcoming main paper will present the complete three-column correspondence (experimental step → geometry → QFT standard) with full algebraic verification.

•Aug 2, 2026•0 citations

Taming the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser

Johannes Fankhauser

I discuss the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment (DCQE) by drawing an analogy to a Bell-type measurement and giving a straightforward account in standard quantum mechanics. The delayed choice quantum eraser experiment turns out to resemble a Bell-type scenario in which the paradox's resolution is rather trivial, and so there really is no mystery. At first glance, the experiment suggests that measurements on one part of an entangled photon pair (the idler) can be employed to control whether the measurement outcome of the other part of the photon pair (the signal) produces interference fringes at a screen after being sent through a double slit. Significantly, the choice whether there is interference or not can be made long after the signal photon encounters the screen. The results of the experiment have been alleged to invoke some sort of 'backwards in time influence'. I argue that this issue can be eliminated by taking into proper account the role of the signal photon. Likewise, in the de Broglie-Bohm picture the particle's trajectories can be given a well-defined description at any instant of time during the experiment. Thus, it is again clear that there is no need to resort to any kind of 'backwards in time influence'.

•Aug 12, 2017•9 citations
This paper explains the delayed choice quantum eraser of Kim et al. (A delayed choice quantum eraser, 1999 ) in terms of the transactional interpretation (TI) of quantum mechanics by Cramer (Rev Mod Phys 58:647, 1986 , The quantum handshake, entanglement, nonlocality and transactions, 1986 ). It is kept deliberately mathematically simple to help explain the transactional technique. The emphasis is on a clear understanding of how the instantaneous “collapse” of the wave function due to a measurement at a specific time and place may be reinterpreted as a relativistically well-defined collapse over the entire path of the photon and over the entire transit time from slit to detector. This is made possible by the use of a retarded offer wave, which is thought to travel from the slits (or rather the small region within the parametric crystal where down-conversion takes place) to the detector and an advanced counter wave traveling backward in time from the detector to the slits. The point here is to make clear how simple the transactional picture is and how much more intuitive the collapse of the wave function becomes if viewed in this way. Also, any confusion about possible retro-causal signaling is put to rest. A delayed choice quantum eraser does not require any sort of backward in time communication. This paper makes the point that it is preferable to use the TI over the usual Copenhagen interpretation for a more intuitive understanding of the quantum eraser delayed choice experiment. Both methods give exactly the same end results and can be used interchangeably.
Abstract The delayed-choice quantum eraser has long been a subject of controversy, and has been looked at as being incomprehensible to having retro-causal effect in time. Here the delayed-choice quantum eraser is theoretically analyzed using standard quantum mechanics. Employing a Mach–Zehnder interferometer, instead of a conventional two-slit interference, brings in surprising clarity. Some common mistakes in interpreting the experiment are pointed out. It is demonstrated that in the delayed mode there is no which-way information present after the particle is registered on the screen or the final detectors, contrary to popular belief. However, it is shown that another kind of path information is present even after the particle is registered in the final detectors. The registered particle can be used to predict the results of certain yet to be made measurements on the which-way detector. This novel correlation can be tested in a careful experiment. It is consequently argued that there is no big mystery in the experiment, and no retro-causal effect whatsoever.
I discuss the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment by drawing an analogy to a Bell-type measurement and giving a straightforward account in standard quantum mechanics. The delayed choice quantum eraser experiment turns out to resemble a Bell-type scenario in which the resolution of the paradox is rather trivial, and so there really is no mystery. At first glance, the experiment suggests that measurements on one part of an entangled photon pair (the idler) can be employed to control whether the measurement outcome of the other part of the photon pair (the signal) produces interference fringes at a screen after being sent through a double slit. Significantly, the choice whether there is interference or not can be made long after the signal photon encounters the screen. The results of the experiment have been alleged to invoke some sort of backwards in time influence. I argue that this issue can be eliminated by taking into proper account the role of the signal photon. Likewise, in the de Broglie–Bohm picture the trajectories of the particle can be given a well-defined description at any instant of time during the experiment. Thus, it is again clear that there is no need to resort to any kind of backwards in time influence. Quanta 2019; 8: 44-56.
This paper presents an observational analysis of the Delayed-Choice Quantum Eraser experiment through the framework of quantum mechanics. The Delayed-Choice Quantum Eraser, a variation of the classic double-slit experiment, demonstrates the intricate relationship between quantum measurement, wave-particle duality, and the temporal ordering of observations. By utilizing the principles of quantum superposition, entanglement, and the non-local collapse of the wave function, we seek to rationalize the counterintuitive outcomes observed in the experiment. Specifically, we explore how the act of measurement retroactively influences the observed behavior of particles, depending on whether or not the which-path information is available. Our analysis underscores the significance of the quantum mechanical concept of wave function collapse across spacetime, providing a deeper understanding of how quantum mechanics reconciles the delayed-choice paradox.
Ever since the proposal of delayed choice quantum erasure and subsequent realization in the experiment by Kim et al., the interpretation and implications of delayed-choice experiments have remained a subject of intense foundational debate. This paper resolves the apparent paradox attached to the experiment using standard quantum mechanics. Using an extended Mach-Zehnder interferometer which captures every operational feature of the original experiment, we show that choosing between which-path and erasure detectors is simply a choice of measurement bases, which does not rewrite a photon's past. Furthermore, by mapping the experiment to a two-way Stern-Gerlach framework, we prove that quantum erasure is an expected result of measuring entangled states, not a physical anomaly. Ultimately, through a pedagogical game, we illustrate that the illusion of retrocausality arises from asking illegitimate questions, and that a forward-in-time description is entirely sufficient to explain the logic.
The delayed-choice experiment and the quantum eraser experiment are two of the most challenging interpretive problems in quantum mechanics. Standard textbook accounts trace the presence or absence of interference to whether the experimenter "knows" the photon's path — a causal framework implying backward-in-time influence. This article offers an intuitive, diagram-rich account grounded in the wave-or-particle geometric framework, revealing that both experiments share a far simpler backbone: interference depends solely on how many waves reach a given detector. One wave → no interference. Two waves → interference. This conclusion alters no mathematical prediction of quantum mechanics; it merely flips the causal arrow from "knowing the path destroys interference" to "the number of waves creates interference." A forthcoming main paper will present the complete three-column correspondence (experimental step → geometry → QFT standard) with full algebraic verification.
I discuss the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment (DCQE) by drawing an analogy to a Bell-type measurement and giving a straightforward account in standard quantum mechanics. The delayed choice quantum eraser experiment turns out to resemble a Bell-type scenario in which the paradox's resolution is rather trivial, and so there really is no mystery. At first glance, the experiment suggests that measurements on one part of an entangled photon pair (the idler) can be employed to control whether the measurement outcome of the other part of the photon pair (the signal) produces interference fringes at a screen after being sent through a double slit. Significantly, the choice whether there is interference or not can be made long after the signal photon encounters the screen. The results of the experiment have been alleged to invoke some sort of 'backwards in time influence'. I argue that this issue can be eliminated by taking into proper account the role of the signal photon. Likewise, in the de Broglie-Bohm picture the particle's trajectories can be given a well-defined description at any instant of time during the experiment. Thus, it is again clear that there is no need to resort to any kind of 'backwards in time influence'.