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:2201.10320

The Quantum Eraser from a Weak Values Perspective

Tom Rivlin

Published Jan 25, 2022• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The quantum eraser variant of the double-slit experiment, and its 'delayed choice' sub-variant, are considered from the perspective of weak value and weak measurement theory (which is briefly reintroduced here). The interference fringes that appear when measuring certain spin states, which can then be 'erased' when measuring other spin states, are shown to be anomalous weak values that depend on particular post-selection choices. By framing the choice of spin measurement as a weak value of a certain weak measurement, it is then made clear what physical claims can and cannot be made about what occurs in the quantum eraser experiment. Specifically, claims about the choice of spin-state `retrocausally' influencing the choice of slit(s) for the particles to travel through are discredited, and a simple framework is presented for understanding how the fringes arise and why they can be 'erased'.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2201.10320

Related papers

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

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

Session C1: APS, AAPT, and SPS Poster Session - A delayed choice quantum eraser experiment that involves no delayed choice, no quantum eraser, and no complementarity

Jeffrey H. Boyd

Kim et al published an article, ``A delayed choice quantum eraser,'' in 1999 that appeared to show many remarkable things, including that the choice of observable erases the interference fringes that were previously recorded in a double slit experiment. However, the solidity of those conclusions hinges on whether or not quantum mechanics provides the only available explanation of that experiment. By thinking outside the box we have a different way of viewing that experiment. We find there is no delayed choice in the Kim experiment of 1999. There is no quantum eraser. What appears to be a delayed choice and a quantum eraser involve a different understanding of Kim's experiment than the one we favor. We also show how the double slit experiment can be understood with local cause and effect, and without complementarity.

•Nov 18, 2011•0 citations

On delayed choice and quantum erasure in two-slit experiment for testing complementarity

Guang-Liang Li

The principle of complementarity is one of the cornerstones of quantum theory. The aim of this study was to advance our understanding of complementarity by analyzing the role of delayed choice and quantum erasers in two-slit experiments, and by proposing experiments for verifying the analysis. The analysis is based on models consisting of measurable spaces and probability measures involved in the experiments. The main findings are as follows: (a) The complementarity principle manifests itself in such a way that wave and particle behaviors cannot be simultaneously observed almost surely with respect to any single, fixed measure. (b) Described by different measures, complementary properties can coexist in the same experimental setup. (c) Which-way information will not preclude or erase interference fringes. (d) Delayed choice and quantum erasers are irrelevant to testing complementarity. (e) It is possible for us to know through which slit each quantum object passed almost surely with respect to the measure corresponding to the slit while the interference pattern is intact. Based on the experiments analyzed, realizable experiments are proposed for verifying the above results.

Journal of Physics Communications•Sep 13, 2021•3 citations

The Enigma of Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser

Tabish Qureshi

The delayed-choice quantum eraser represents an interesting experiment that exemplifies Bohr's principle of complementarity in a beautiful way. According to the complementarity principle, in a two-path interference experiment, the knowledge of which path was taken by the particle and the appearance of interference are mutually exclusive. Even when the which-path information is merely retained in specific quantum path-markers, without being actually read, it suffices to eliminate interference. Nevertheless, if this path information is erased in some manner, the interference re-emerges, a phenomenon referred to as the quantum eraser. An intriguing aspect of this experiment is that if the path information is erased after the particle has been detected on the screen, the interference still reappears, a phenomenon known as the delayed-choice quantum eraser. This observation has led to the interpretation that the particle can be influenced to exhibit characteristics of either a particle or a wave based on a decision made long after it has been registered on the screen. This idea has sparked considerable debate and discussions surrounding retrocausality. This controversy is reviewed here, and a detailed resolution provided. Quanta 2025; 14: 66–74.

arXiv:2510.23539•Quanta•Nov 23, 2025•1 citation

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
The quantum eraser variant of the double-slit experiment, and its 'delayed choice' sub-variant, are considered from the perspective of weak value and weak measurement theory (which is briefly reintroduced here). The interference fringes that appear when measuring certain spin states, which can then be 'erased' when measuring other spin states, are shown to be anomalous weak values that depend on particular post-selection choices. By framing the choice of spin measurement as a weak value of a certain weak measurement, it is then made clear what physical claims can and cannot be made about what occurs in the quantum eraser experiment. Specifically, claims about the choice of spin-state `retrocausally' influencing the choice of slit(s) for the particles to travel through are discredited, and a simple framework is presented for understanding how the fringes arise and why they can be 'erased'.
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.
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'.
Kim et al published an article, ``A delayed choice quantum eraser,'' in 1999 that appeared to show many remarkable things, including that the choice of observable erases the interference fringes that were previously recorded in a double slit experiment. However, the solidity of those conclusions hinges on whether or not quantum mechanics provides the only available explanation of that experiment. By thinking outside the box we have a different way of viewing that experiment. We find there is no delayed choice in the Kim experiment of 1999. There is no quantum eraser. What appears to be a delayed choice and a quantum eraser involve a different understanding of Kim's experiment than the one we favor. We also show how the double slit experiment can be understood with local cause and effect, and without complementarity.
The principle of complementarity is one of the cornerstones of quantum theory. The aim of this study was to advance our understanding of complementarity by analyzing the role of delayed choice and quantum erasers in two-slit experiments, and by proposing experiments for verifying the analysis. The analysis is based on models consisting of measurable spaces and probability measures involved in the experiments. The main findings are as follows: (a) The complementarity principle manifests itself in such a way that wave and particle behaviors cannot be simultaneously observed almost surely with respect to any single, fixed measure. (b) Described by different measures, complementary properties can coexist in the same experimental setup. (c) Which-way information will not preclude or erase interference fringes. (d) Delayed choice and quantum erasers are irrelevant to testing complementarity. (e) It is possible for us to know through which slit each quantum object passed almost surely with respect to the measure corresponding to the slit while the interference pattern is intact. Based on the experiments analyzed, realizable experiments are proposed for verifying the above results.
The delayed-choice quantum eraser represents an interesting experiment that exemplifies Bohr's principle of complementarity in a beautiful way. According to the complementarity principle, in a two-path interference experiment, the knowledge of which path was taken by the particle and the appearance of interference are mutually exclusive. Even when the which-path information is merely retained in specific quantum path-markers, without being actually read, it suffices to eliminate interference. Nevertheless, if this path information is erased in some manner, the interference re-emerges, a phenomenon referred to as the quantum eraser. An intriguing aspect of this experiment is that if the path information is erased after the particle has been detected on the screen, the interference still reappears, a phenomenon known as the delayed-choice quantum eraser. This observation has led to the interpretation that the particle can be influenced to exhibit characteristics of either a particle or a wave based on a decision made long after it has been registered on the screen. This idea has sparked considerable debate and discussions surrounding retrocausality. This controversy is reviewed here, and a detailed resolution provided. Quanta 2025; 14: 66–74.
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.