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:2007.03624

Where is the photon in an interferometer?

J. E. Avron

Published Jul 7, 2020• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

In a paper titled "Asking photons where they have been?" \cite{LV} Danan, Farfurnik, Bar-Ad and Vaidman describe an experiment with pre and post selected photons going through nested Mach-Zehnder interferometers. They find that some of the mirrors leave no footprints on the signal and interpret this as evidence that the photon skipped these mirrors. They argue that the experiment supports Aharonov-Vaidman's formulation of quantum mechanics \cite{AharonovVaidman} where post-selected particles are assigned disconnected trajectories. I review the experiment and analyze it within the orthodox framework of quantum mechanics. The standard view of interfering trajectories accounts for the experimental findings.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2007.03624

Related papers

Photons in a nested Mach-Zehnder interferometer

J. E. Avron

In a paper titled ``Asking photons where they have been? Danan, Farfurnik, Bar-Ad and Vaidman describe an experiment with pre and post selected photons going through nested Mach-Zehnder interferometers. They find that some of the mirrors leave no footprints on the signal and interpret this as evidence that the photon skipped these mirrors and by a discontinuous path. I review the experiment and analyze it within the orthodox framework of quantum mechanics. The picture of interfering multiple trajectories provide a satisfactory explanation of the experimental findings and the absence of footprints.

•Jul 7, 2020•0 citations

Paradox of photons disconnected trajectories being located by means of “weak measurements” in the nested Mach–Zehnder interferometer

G. N. Nikolaev

Recently, a scheme based on the method of weak measurements to register the trajectories of photons passing through a nested Mach–Zehnder interferometer was proposed [L. Vaidman, Phys. Rev. A 87 , 052104 (2013)] and then realized [A. Danan, D. Farfurnik, S. Bar-Ad, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 , 240402 (2013)]. Interpreting the results of the experiment, the authors concluded that “the photons do not always follow continuous trajectories.” It is shown in this work that these results can be easily and clearly explained in terms of traditional classical electrodynamics or quantum mechanics implying the continuity of all possible paths of photons. Consequently, a new concept of disconnected trajectories proposed by the authors of work [Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 , 240402 (2013)] is unnecessary.

arXiv:1706.00662•Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics Letters•Feb 1, 2017•23 citations

Asking photons where have they been

Danan, Ariel, Demitry Farfurnik, Shimshon Bar-Ad +1 more

Quantum mechanics does not provide a clear answer to the question: What was the past of a photon which went through an interferometer? Various welcher weg measurements, delayed-choice which-path experiments and weak-measurements of photons in interferometers presented the past of a photon as a trajectory or a set of trajectories. We have carried out experimental weak measurements of the paths of photons going through a nested Mach-Zehnder interferometer which show a different picture: the past of a photon is not a set of continuous trajectories. The photons tell us that they have been in the parts of the interferometer which they could not have possibly reached! Our results lead to rejection of a "common sense" approach to the past of a quantum particle. On the other hand, they have a simple explanation within the framework of the two-state vector formalism of quantum theory.

arXiv:1304.7469•Apr 28, 2013•1 citation

Asking Photons "Where Have They Been?"

Lev Vaidman A

Quantum mechanics does not provide a clear answer to the question: What was the past of a photon which went through an interferometer? Various welcher weg measurements, delayed-choice which-path experiments and weak-measurements of photons in interferometers presented the past of a photon as a trajectory or a set of trajectories. We have carried out experimental weak measurements of the paths of photons going through a nested Mach-Zehnder interferometer which show a different picture: the past of a photon is not a set of continuous trajectories. The photons tell us that they have been in the parts of the interferometer which they could not have possibly reached! Our results lead to rejection of a ``common sense'' approach to the past of a quantum particle. On the other hand, they have a simple explanation within the framework of the two-state vector formalism of quantum theory.

The Rochester Conferences on Coherence and Quantum Optics and the Quantum Information and Measurement meeting•Jan 1, 2013•6 citations

When Photons Are Lying about Where They Have Been

Lev Vaidman, Izumi Tsutsui

The history of photons in a nested Mach-Zehnder interferometer with an inserted Dove prism is analyzed. It is argued that the Dove prism does not change the past of the photon. Alonso and Jordan correctly point out that an experiment by Danan et al. demonstrating the past of the photon in a nested interferometer will show different results when the Dove prism is inserted. The reason, however, is not that the past is changed, but that the experimental demonstration becomes incorrect. The explanation of a signal from the place in which the photon was (almost) not present is given. Bohmian trajectory of the photon is specified.

arXiv:1806.00695•Entropy•Jul 19, 2018•23 citations

An Improved Experiment to Determine the ‘Past of a Particle’ in the Nested Mach–Zehnder Interferometer

Alon Ben-Israel, Lukas Knips, Jan Dziewior +4 more

We argue that the modification proposed by Li et al. [Chin. Phys. Lett. 32 (2015) 050303] to the experiment of Danan et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 (2013) 240402] does not test the past of the photon as characterized by local weak traces. Instead of answering the questions: (i) were the photons in A? (ii) were the photons in B? and (iii) were the photons in C? the proposed experiment measures a degenerate operator answering the questions: (i) were the photons in A? and (ii) were the photons in B and C together? A negative answer to the last question does not tell us if photons were present in B or C. On the other hand, a simple variation of the proposal by Li et al. does provide conceptually better evidence for the past of the pre- and post-selected photon, but this evidence will be in agreement with the results of Danan et al.

arXiv:1701.04109•Chinese Physics Letters•Feb 1, 2017•19 citations
In a paper titled "Asking photons where they have been?" \cite{LV} Danan, Farfurnik, Bar-Ad and Vaidman describe an experiment with pre and post selected photons going through nested Mach-Zehnder interferometers. They find that some of the mirrors leave no footprints on the signal and interpret this as evidence that the photon skipped these mirrors. They argue that the experiment supports Aharonov-Vaidman's formulation of quantum mechanics \cite{AharonovVaidman} where post-selected particles are assigned disconnected trajectories. I review the experiment and analyze it within the orthodox framework of quantum mechanics. The standard view of interfering trajectories accounts for the experimental findings.
In a paper titled ``Asking photons where they have been? Danan, Farfurnik, Bar-Ad and Vaidman describe an experiment with pre and post selected photons going through nested Mach-Zehnder interferometers. They find that some of the mirrors leave no footprints on the signal and interpret this as evidence that the photon skipped these mirrors and by a discontinuous path. I review the experiment and analyze it within the orthodox framework of quantum mechanics. The picture of interfering multiple trajectories provide a satisfactory explanation of the experimental findings and the absence of footprints.
Recently, a scheme based on the method of weak measurements to register the trajectories of photons passing through a nested Mach–Zehnder interferometer was proposed [L. Vaidman, Phys. Rev. A 87 , 052104 (2013)] and then realized [A. Danan, D. Farfurnik, S. Bar-Ad, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 , 240402 (2013)]. Interpreting the results of the experiment, the authors concluded that “the photons do not always follow continuous trajectories.” It is shown in this work that these results can be easily and clearly explained in terms of traditional classical electrodynamics or quantum mechanics implying the continuity of all possible paths of photons. Consequently, a new concept of disconnected trajectories proposed by the authors of work [Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 , 240402 (2013)] is unnecessary.
Quantum mechanics does not provide a clear answer to the question: What was the past of a photon which went through an interferometer? Various welcher weg measurements, delayed-choice which-path experiments and weak-measurements of photons in interferometers presented the past of a photon as a trajectory or a set of trajectories. We have carried out experimental weak measurements of the paths of photons going through a nested Mach-Zehnder interferometer which show a different picture: the past of a photon is not a set of continuous trajectories. The photons tell us that they have been in the parts of the interferometer which they could not have possibly reached! Our results lead to rejection of a "common sense" approach to the past of a quantum particle. On the other hand, they have a simple explanation within the framework of the two-state vector formalism of quantum theory.
Quantum mechanics does not provide a clear answer to the question: What was the past of a photon which went through an interferometer? Various welcher weg measurements, delayed-choice which-path experiments and weak-measurements of photons in interferometers presented the past of a photon as a trajectory or a set of trajectories. We have carried out experimental weak measurements of the paths of photons going through a nested Mach-Zehnder interferometer which show a different picture: the past of a photon is not a set of continuous trajectories. The photons tell us that they have been in the parts of the interferometer which they could not have possibly reached! Our results lead to rejection of a ``common sense'' approach to the past of a quantum particle. On the other hand, they have a simple explanation within the framework of the two-state vector formalism of quantum theory.
The history of photons in a nested Mach-Zehnder interferometer with an inserted Dove prism is analyzed. It is argued that the Dove prism does not change the past of the photon. Alonso and Jordan correctly point out that an experiment by Danan et al. demonstrating the past of the photon in a nested interferometer will show different results when the Dove prism is inserted. The reason, however, is not that the past is changed, but that the experimental demonstration becomes incorrect. The explanation of a signal from the place in which the photon was (almost) not present is given. Bohmian trajectory of the photon is specified.
We argue that the modification proposed by Li et al. [Chin. Phys. Lett. 32 (2015) 050303] to the experiment of Danan et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 (2013) 240402] does not test the past of the photon as characterized by local weak traces. Instead of answering the questions: (i) were the photons in A? (ii) were the photons in B? and (iii) were the photons in C? the proposed experiment measures a degenerate operator answering the questions: (i) were the photons in A? and (ii) were the photons in B and C together? A negative answer to the last question does not tell us if photons were present in B or C. On the other hand, a simple variation of the proposal by Li et al. does provide conceptually better evidence for the past of the pre- and post-selected photon, but this evidence will be in agreement with the results of Danan et al.