Abstract Interference of more and more massive objects provides a spectacular confirmation of quantum theory. It is usually regarded as support for “wave–particle duality” and in an extension of this duality even as support for “complementarity”. We first give an outline of the historical development of these notions. Already here it becomes evident that they are hard to define rigorously, i.e. have mainly a heuristic function. Then we discuss recent interference experiments of large and complex molecules which seem to support this heuristic function of “duality”. However, we show that in these experiments the diffraction of a delocalized center-of-mass wave function depends on the interaction of the localized structure of the molecule with the diffraction element. Thus, the molecules display “dual features” at the same time, which contradicts the usual understanding of wave–particle duality. We conclude that the notion of “wave–particle duality” deserves no place in modern quantum physics.
Abstract Interference of more and more massive objects provides a spectacular confirmation of quantum theory. It is usually regarded as support for “wave–particle duality” and in an extension of this duality even as support for “complementarity”. We first give an outline of the historical development of these notions. Already here it becomes evident that they are hard to define rigorously, i.e. have mainly a heuristic function. Then we discuss recent interference experiments of large and complex molecules which seem to support this heuristic function of “duality”. However, we show that in these experiments the diffraction of a delocalized center-of-mass wave function depends on the interaction of the localized structure of the molecule with the diffraction element. Thus, the molecules display “dual features” at the same time, which contradicts the usual understanding of wave–particle duality. We conclude that the notion of “wave–particle duality” deserves no place in modern quantum physics.
Here, the concept of a wave-particle duality is questioned. First, the experimental proofs existing, respectively, for particles and waves are examined. In the case of particles, no experimental evidence can be found which establishes them; it seems that particles have always been taken for granted. In the case of waves, considerable evidence has accumulated with results on diffraction, interference, and self-interference of larger and larger objects. Then an important remark is made concerning the fact that unlike particles, waves are not observation-dependent: waves existed before observation otherwise the patterns of diffraction or interference would not have been appearing; the wave nature does not depend on the making of a measurement, there is no measurement problem for waves. Consequently, since waves are not observation-dependent, if the objects are demonstrated to be waves, they are only waves. This fact, along with some other evidence, disagrees with the current interpretation of the Wheeler-type delayed-choice experiments, where the absence of interference is interpreted as a particle behavior. Finally, recent works regarding the de Broglie‐Bohm theory are presented, which lead to suggest a new wave-only version of this theory. It is concluded that a wave-only view might be worth considering instead of the wave-particle duality view which has prevailed so far.
The simplest but deepest questions of the philosophy of quantum mechanics are these: Are quantum systems waves, or are they particles? Are they both or are they neither? When light bounces an electron out of the surface of an alkali metal it behaves like a particle. Light carries momentum but also a punch. Just as there is no such thing as half a punch, so there is no such thing as half a quantum of light. On the other hand, the shadow formed on a screen by an object has soft edges, edges which get softer as the object is moved away from the screen. Light exhibits the phenomena of diffraction and interference and so is wavelike. This dual behaviour of light, and indeed of matter itself, is called wave-particle duality. The wave nature of a quantum system is reflected in wave mechanics which assigns a wave-function to the system. But the dual nature of light was noticed before Schrodinger developed the wave-mechanical formalism in 1926. In fact, it goes back at least as far as Einsteins explanation of the photoelectric effect in 1905. Wave-particle duality is not something that arises within the quantum mechanical formalism. It is something which is expressed within it, and is something which is best discussed in terms of the paradoxes that quantum experiments force upon physics. In fact, the simplest and most immediately disturbing of the quantummechanical paradoxes arise out of wave-particle duality. We take the two-slit experiment and the delayed-choice experiment as examples.
Abstract One of the cornerstones of quantum physics is the wave nature of matter. It explains experimentally observed effects like interference and diffraction, occurring when an object moves from one place to another along several indistinguishable ways simultaneously. The wave nature disappears when the individual ways are distinguishable. In this case, the particle nature of the object becomes visible. To determine the particle nature quantitatively, the way of the object has to be measured. Here, large progress has been made recently with new techniques, enabling one to investigate single moving atoms in a controlled manner. Two examples are discussed in the following two sections. The first experiment describes an atom interferometer, where the way of the atom is entangled with its internal state. This allows one to explore the origin of wave‐particle duality and perform a quantitative test of this fundamental principle. The second experiment reports on the observation of an atom‐photon molecule, a bound state between an atom and a single photon. A fascinating aspect of this system is that it makes possible to monitor the motion of a single neutral atom in real time.
Abstract The double-slit experiment is a classic experiment that presents the clearest manifestation of wave-particle duality, one of the fundamental principles of quantum mechanics. The double-slit experiment still remains the phenomenon that demonstrates wave-particle duality at the most fundamental level. This phenomenon quantitatively and conceptually demonstrates that microscopic objects can behave like both waves and particles at the same time. This article provides an in-depth analysis of the physical nature of dualism, the mechanism of formation of the interference pattern, and the impact of the act of observation on the dynamics of quantum systems. The need for a new perspective on this topic is due to the fact that the current uncertainty in the interpretation of quantum reality has not yet been completely eliminated, and the boundaries between classical and quantum behavior in microscopic objects are still being explored. The results presented here restructure the deep mechanisms of the interference picture, more clearly frame the relationship between observation and wavefunction collapse, and provide a quantum. Since the article attempts to provide a complete answer to the mechanism of the formation of wave-particle duality, extensive space is given to sections such as historical development, theoretical models, modern research, etc. New approaches to this phenomenon have been developed using modern research and string theory. As a result, a new mathematical expression has been proposed that explains the reasons for the initial emergence of wave-particle duality, and is also important for string theory. The article explains the measurement problem with a more effective physical structure and ontological model.
The wave–particle duality hypothesis for massive particles has been confirmed by an overwhelming variety of indirect experimental evidence. In addition, direct interferometric tests have been made on particles like electrons, neutrons and even a few molecules, explicitly showing wave-like diffraction and interference phenomena. Of particular interest in this direction, single particle interference has also been demonstrated, but only for the electron case. No such kind of direct information was available for antiparticles or antimatter in general. After briefly discussing the subjects of antimatter research and interferometry, I present here the first evidence of single particle antimatter interference, made with positrons.
The quantum object is in general considered as displaying both wave and particle nature. By particle is understood an item localized in a very small volume of the space, and which cannot be simultaneously in two disjoint regions of the space. By wave, to the contrary, is understood a distributed item, occupying in some cases two or more disjoint regions of the space. The quantum formalism did not explain until today the so-called “collapse” of the wave-function, i.e. the shrinking of the wave-function to one small region of the space, when a macroscopic object is encountered. This seems to happen in “which-way” experiments. A very appealing explanation for this behavior is the idea of a particle, localized in some limited part of the wave-function. The present article challenges the concept of particle. It proves in the base of a variant of the Tan, Walls and Collett experiment, that this concept leads to a situation in which the particle has to be simultaneously in two places distant from one another—situation that contradicts the very definition of a particle. Another argument is based on a modified version of the Afshar experiment, showing that the concept of particle is problematic. The concept of particle makes additional difficulties when the wave-function passes through fields. An unexpected possibility to solve these difficulties seems to arise from the cavity quantum electrodynamics studies done recently by S. Savasta and his collaborators. It involves virtual particles. One of these studies is briefly described here. Though, experimental results are needed, so that it is too soon to conclude whether it speaks in favor, or against the concept of particle.