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

Bulletin of the American Physical Society

Entanglement, Complementarity, and Decoherence: Bohr on the Classical and the Macroscopic

Don A. Howard

Published Oct 31, 2008• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Related papers

Beyond Complementarity

Ruth E. Kastner

It is argued that Niels Bohr ultimately arrived at positivistic and antirealist-flavored statements because of weaknesses in his initial objective of accounting for measurement in physical terms. Bohr's investigative approach faced a dilemma, the choices being (i) conceptual inconsistency or (ii) taking the classical realm as primitive. In either case, Bohr's `Complementarity' does not adequately explain or account for the emergence of a macroscopic, classical domain from a microscopic domain described by quantum mechanics. A diagnosis of the basic problem is offered, and an alternative way forward is indicated.

arXiv:1601.07545•WORLD SCIENTIFIC (EUROPE) eBooks•Nov 14, 2016•1 citation

ENTANGLEMENT, COMPLEMENTARITY AND DECOHERENCE

J. M. Raimond

Solvay Conference on Physics•Aug 1, 2003•0 citations

Complementarity and the Nature of Uncertainty Relations in Einstein–Bohr Recoiling Slit Experiment

Shogo Tanimura

A model of the Einstein–Bohr recoiling slit experiment is formulated in a fully quantum theoretical setting. In this model, the state and dynamics of a movable wall that has two slits in it, as well as the state of a particle incoming to the two slits, are described by quantum mechanics. Using this model, we analyzed complementarity between exhibiting an interference pattern and distinguishing the particle path. Comparing the Kennard–Robertson type and the Ozawa-type uncertainty relations, we conclude that the uncertainty relation involved in the double-slit experiment is not the Ozawa-type uncertainty relation but the Kennard-type uncertainty relation of the position and the momentum of the double-slit wall. A possible experiment to test the complementarity relation is suggested. It is also argued that various phenomena which occur at the interface of a quantum system and a classical system, including distinguishability, interference, decoherence, quantum eraser, and weak value, can be understood as aspects of entanglement. Quanta 2015; 4: 1–9.

arXiv:quant-ph/0703118•Quanta•Jul 15, 2015•3 citations

Decoherence and entanglement in quantum systems

Journal of Russian Laser Research•Sep 1, 2007•0 citations

Quantum interference, complementarity and entanglement

Tedros Tsegaye

•Jan 1, 2000•0 citations

Entanglement limits duality and vice versa

Xiao‐Feng Qian, A. Nick Vamivakas, Joseph H. Eberly

Ninety years ago in 1927, at an international congress in Como, Italy, Niels Bohr gave an address which is recognized as the first instance in which the term "complementarity", as a physical concept, was spoken publicly [1], revealing Bohr's own thinking about Louis de Broglie's "duality". Bohr had very slowly accepted duality as a principle of physics: close observation of any quantum object will reveal either wave-like or particle-like behavior, one or the other of two fundamental and complementary features. Little disagreement exists today about complementarity's importance and broad applicability in quantum science. Book-length scholarly examinations even provide speculations about the relevance of complementarity in fields as different from physics as biology, psychology and social anthropology, connections which were apparently of interest to Bohr himself (see Jammer [2], Murdoch [3] and Whitaker [4]). Confusion evident in Como following his talk was not eliminated by Bohr's article [1], and complementarity has been subjected to nine decades of repeated examination ever since with no agreed resolution. Semi-popular treatments [5] as well as expert examinations [6-9] show that the topic cannot be avoided, and complementarity retains its central place in the interpretation of quantum mechanics. However, recent approaches by our group [10-13] and others [14-20] to the underlying notion of coherence now allow us to present a universal formulation of complementarity that may signal the end to the confusion. We demonstrate a new relationship that constrains the behavior of an electromagnetic field (quantum or classical) in the fundamental context of two-slit experiments. We show that entanglement is the ingredient needed to complete Bohr's formulation of complementarity, debated for decades because of its incompleteness.

arXiv:1803.04611•Optica•Jul 30, 2018•91 citations
It is argued that Niels Bohr ultimately arrived at positivistic and antirealist-flavored statements because of weaknesses in his initial objective of accounting for measurement in physical terms. Bohr's investigative approach faced a dilemma, the choices being (i) conceptual inconsistency or (ii) taking the classical realm as primitive. In either case, Bohr's `Complementarity' does not adequately explain or account for the emergence of a macroscopic, classical domain from a microscopic domain described by quantum mechanics. A diagnosis of the basic problem is offered, and an alternative way forward is indicated.
A model of the Einstein–Bohr recoiling slit experiment is formulated in a fully quantum theoretical setting. In this model, the state and dynamics of a movable wall that has two slits in it, as well as the state of a particle incoming to the two slits, are described by quantum mechanics. Using this model, we analyzed complementarity between exhibiting an interference pattern and distinguishing the particle path. Comparing the Kennard–Robertson type and the Ozawa-type uncertainty relations, we conclude that the uncertainty relation involved in the double-slit experiment is not the Ozawa-type uncertainty relation but the Kennard-type uncertainty relation of the position and the momentum of the double-slit wall. A possible experiment to test the complementarity relation is suggested. It is also argued that various phenomena which occur at the interface of a quantum system and a classical system, including distinguishability, interference, decoherence, quantum eraser, and weak value, can be understood as aspects of entanglement. Quanta 2015; 4: 1–9.
Ninety years ago in 1927, at an international congress in Como, Italy, Niels Bohr gave an address which is recognized as the first instance in which the term "complementarity", as a physical concept, was spoken publicly [1], revealing Bohr's own thinking about Louis de Broglie's "duality". Bohr had very slowly accepted duality as a principle of physics: close observation of any quantum object will reveal either wave-like or particle-like behavior, one or the other of two fundamental and complementary features. Little disagreement exists today about complementarity's importance and broad applicability in quantum science. Book-length scholarly examinations even provide speculations about the relevance of complementarity in fields as different from physics as biology, psychology and social anthropology, connections which were apparently of interest to Bohr himself (see Jammer [2], Murdoch [3] and Whitaker [4]). Confusion evident in Como following his talk was not eliminated by Bohr's article [1], and complementarity has been subjected to nine decades of repeated examination ever since with no agreed resolution. Semi-popular treatments [5] as well as expert examinations [6-9] show that the topic cannot be avoided, and complementarity retains its central place in the interpretation of quantum mechanics. However, recent approaches by our group [10-13] and others [14-20] to the underlying notion of coherence now allow us to present a universal formulation of complementarity that may signal the end to the confusion. We demonstrate a new relationship that constrains the behavior of an electromagnetic field (quantum or classical) in the fundamental context of two-slit experiments. We show that entanglement is the ingredient needed to complete Bohr's formulation of complementarity, debated for decades because of its incompleteness.