Many delayed-choice experiments based on Mach-Zehnder interferometers (MZI) have been thought and made to address the fundamental problem of wave-particle duality. Conventional wisdoms long hold that by inserting or removing the second beam splitter (BS2) in a controllable way, microscopic particles (photons, electrons, etc.) transporting within the MZI can lie in the quantum superposition of the wave and particle state as ψ=a_wψ_wave+a_pψ_particle. Here we present an alternative interpretation to these delayed-choice experiments. We notice that as all composite devices of MZI including BS2 are purely classical, the inserting and removing operation of BS2 imposes a time-modulated Hamiltonian H_mod(t)=a(t)H_in+b(t)H_out, instead of a quantum superposition of H_in and H_out as H=a_wH_in+b_pH_out, to act upon the incident wave function. Solution of this quantum scattering problem, rather than the long held quantum eigen-problem yields a synchronically time-modulated output wave function as ψ_mod=a(t)ψ_wave+b(t)ψ_particle. As a result, the probability of particle output from the MZI behaves as if they are in the superposition of the wave and particle state when many events over time accumulation are counted and averaged. We expect these elementary but insightful analyses will shed a new light on exploring basic physics beyond the long-held wisdom of wave-particle duality and principle of complementarity.
Many delayed-choice experiments based on Mach-Zehnder interferometers (MZI) have been thought and made to address the fundamental problem of wave-particle duality. Conventional wisdoms long hold that by inserting or removing the second beam splitter (BS2) in a controllable way, microscopic particles (photons, electrons, etc.) transporting within the MZI can lie in the quantum superposition of the wave and particle state as ψ=a_wψ_wave+a_pψ_particle. Here we present an alternative interpretation to these delayed-choice experiments. We notice that as all composite devices of MZI including BS2 are purely classical, the inserting and removing operation of BS2 imposes a time-modulated Hamiltonian H_mod(t)=a(t)H_in+b(t)H_out, instead of a quantum superposition of H_in and H_out as H=a_wH_in+b_pH_out, to act upon the incident wave function. Solution of this quantum scattering problem, rather than the long held quantum eigen-problem yields a synchronically time-modulated output wave function as ψ_mod=a(t)ψ_wave+b(t)ψ_particle. As a result, the probability of particle output from the MZI behaves as if they are in the superposition of the wave and particle state when many events over time accumulation are counted and averaged. We expect these elementary but insightful analyses will shed a new light on exploring basic physics beyond the long-held wisdom of wave-particle duality and principle of complementarity.
Many delayed-choice experiments based on Mach–Zehnder interferometers (MZI) have been considered and made to address the fundamental problem of wave-particle duality. Conventional wisdom long holds that by inserting or removing the second beam splitter (BS2) in a controllable way, microscopic particles (photons, electrons, etc.) transporting within the MZI can lie in the quantum superposition of the wave and particle state as ψ = a w ψ wave + a p ψ particle . Here we present an alternative interpretation to these delayed-choice experiments. We notice that as the BS2 is purely classical, the inserting and removing operation of the BS2 imposes a time-modulated Hamiltonian H mod (t) = a(t)H in + b(t)H out , instead of a quantum superposition of H in and H out as H = a w H in + a p H out , to act upon the incident wave function. Solution of this quantum scattering problem, rather than the long held quantum eigen-problem yields a synchronically time-modulated output wave function as ψ mod (t) = a(t)ψ wave + b(t)ψ particle , instead of the stationary quantum superposition state ψ = a w ψ wave + a p ψ particle . As a result, the probability of particle output from the MZI behaves as if they are in the superposition of the wave and particle state when many events over time accumulation are counted and averaged. We expect that these elementary but insightful analyses will shed a new light on exploring basic physics beyond the long-held wisdom of wave-particle duality and the principle of complementarity.
A quantum system can behave as a wave or as a particle, depending on the experimental arrangement. When, for example, measuring a photon using a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, the photon acts as a wave if the second beam splitter is inserted, but as a particle if this beam splitter is omitted. The decision of whether or not to insert this beam splitter can be made after the photon has entered the interferometer, as in Wheeler's famous delayed-choice thought experiment. In recent quantum versions of this experiment, this decision is controlled by a quantum ancilla, while the beam splitter is itself still a classical object. Here, we propose and realize a variant of the quantum delayed-choice experiment. We configure a superconducting quantum circuit as a Ramsey interferometer, where the element that acts as the first beam splitter can be put in a quantum superposition of its active and inactive states, as verified by the negative values of its Wigner function. We show that this enables the wave and particle aspects of the system to be observed with a single setup, without involving an ancilla that is not itself a part of the interferometer. We also study the transition of this quantum beam splitter from a quantum to a classical object due to decoherence, as observed by monitoring the interferometer output.
The chapter discusses the Mach–Zehnder interferometer (MZI), which uses beam splitters in combination with mirrors to place a photon into a superposition of paths. In a final beam splitter, the two paths may be recombined to interfere, showing wave behavior. If the final beam splitter is removed, the photon is definitely in one path or the other, showing particle behavior. The polarization of light allows additional applications—one can use a polarizing beam splitter to separate and reconstitute the wave functions of a photon polarized at an angle. In a delayed-choice experiment, one decides which kind of experiment one is to do, particle or wave, after the photon has already entered the arms of the MZI. The chapter discusses a version of this that puts the MZI and a second-detector photon in an entangled state of particle and wave results.
\n\nThe Mach-Zehnder interferometer (MZI) is a regular yet simple instrument to test wave-particle duality. One key device in a standard MZI is the beam splitter 2 (BS2). Here we make a simple quantum mechanics analysis about the wave function evolution and find that the strong and exclusive interaction of BS2 with the incident microscopic particle beam (photons, electrons, etc.) is the fundamental reason why standard MZIs could not allow for the simultaneous observation of wave and particle properties of these particles. A weak-measurement (WM) MZI setup is then proposed, where BS2 is replaced with a deliberately designed highly transparent interference screen operating via either weak absorption or weak-scattering effect. Quantum-mechanical analysis on this WM-MZI shows that the overall power to make simultaneous observation of interference fringe (wave nature) and which-path information (particle nature) of microscopic particles can be significantly enhanced compared with the standard MZIs.\n
Bohr's complementarity notion is at the heart of quantum physics. It suggests that quantum systems are observed as waves or particles depending on the type of measurement, i.e., the experimental arrangement, they are subjected to. For instance, sending single photons to an open or closed Mach-Zehnder interferometer (MZI) leads to the observation of particle or wave behaviours, respectively. In 1984, Wheeler proposed a "Gedanken" delayed-choice experiment in which the interferometer configuration is chosen at will by the experimentalist only after the photon has already passed the input beam-splitter (BS_in) of the device. This experiment was realized using a single photon source and showed that Bohr's complementarity notion was still obeyed.It was recently proposed to take Wheeler's experiment one step further by employing an output "quantum beam-splitter" (QBS), i.e.,preparing BS_out in a coherent superposition of being absent and present. This allows choosing the type of measurement, i.e., wave or particle, only after having determined the state of the QBS, which can be (in principle) infinitely delayed.We realized such an experiment by exploiting the resource of entanglement, in this case pairs of polarization entangled photons. The behaviour of one of the paired photons, called the test photon, is analysed using a MZI having a QBS at its output. This QBS is enabled by entanglement and made of a polarization dependent beam-splitter. The other photon, called the corroborative photon, allows determining the state of the QBS, and consequently, which test photon behaviour (wave, particle, or both) is observed.By manipulating the corroborative photon polarization state, we demonstrate a continuous morphing of the test photon from wave to particle behaviour. This refutes simple models of single photons behaving exclusively as waves or particles. The state of the QBS is determined via the measurement of the corroborative photon only after the test photon has already been detected. The space-like separation between the two measurements invalidates local-hidden variable models associated with pre-existing information about the measurement outcomes. In other words, when the test photon is detected, no information is available about the type of measurement it underwent. These results still perfectly obey Bohr's complementarity notion and its extension.
The Mach-Zehnder Interferometer (MZI) is used to illustrate the long-standing wave-particle duality problem. How can the photon divide at the first beam splitter and yet terminate on either arm with its undiminished energy? Why is which-way (welcher weg) information incompatible with wave interference? How do we explain Wheeler’s delayed choice experiment? The position adopted is that the photon has two identities, one supporting particle features and the other wave features. There is photon kinetic energy that never splits (on half-silvered mirrors) or diffracts (in pinholes or slits). Then there is photon probability waves that do diffract and can reinforce or cancel. Interpretations of these two identities are suggested.