Quantum mechanical uncertainty After reviewing the main characteristics of the classical description of light, let us discuss those aspects of the quantization of the electromagnetic field which are of relevance for the analysis of the phenomena we are interested in. It seems a reasonable place to start to make clear the fundamental difference between the classical and the quantum mechanical description of nature; we will come across this difference many times when discussing experiments, and it will often give us a headache. We have to deal with the physical meaning of what is called uncertainty. The starting point of the classical description is the conviction that natural processes have a “factual” character. This means that physical variables such as the position or momentum of a particle have, in each single case, a well defined (in general, time dependent) value. However, it will not always be possible to measure all the appropriate variables (for instance, the instantaneous electric field strength of a radiation field); furthermore under normal circumstances we are able to measure only with a finite precision. Hence the basic credo of classical physics should be given in the following form: we are justified in imagining a world with variables possessing well defined values which are not known precisely (or not known at all). In doing this we are not forming any conclusions that contradict our everyday experiences. This is the fundamental concept of classical statistics: we are satisfied with the use of probability distributions for the variables we are interested in, not from fundamental but purely practical reasons.
Quantum mechanical uncertainty After reviewing the main characteristics of the classical description of light, let us discuss those aspects of the quantization of the electromagnetic field which are of relevance for the analysis of the phenomena we are interested in. It seems a reasonable place to start to make clear the fundamental difference between the classical and the quantum mechanical description of nature; we will come across this difference many times when discussing experiments, and it will often give us a headache. We have to deal with the physical meaning of what is called uncertainty. The starting point of the classical description is the conviction that natural processes have a “factual” character. This means that physical variables such as the position or momentum of a particle have, in each single case, a well defined (in general, time dependent) value. However, it will not always be possible to measure all the appropriate variables (for instance, the instantaneous electric field strength of a radiation field); furthermore under normal circumstances we are able to measure only with a finite precision. Hence the basic credo of classical physics should be given in the following form: we are justified in imagining a world with variables possessing well defined values which are not known precisely (or not known at all). In doing this we are not forming any conclusions that contradict our everyday experiences. This is the fundamental concept of classical statistics: we are satisfied with the use of probability distributions for the variables we are interested in, not from fundamental but purely practical reasons.
As in classical physics, also in quantum mechanics: physical processes are bound to obey conservation laws. However, there is an important difference. While in classical physics we can suppose that all variables have definite values (irrespective of whether we know them or not), quantum mechanics allows them to be intrinsically uncertain. In those cases conservation laws apply only to ensemble averages (expectation values), and hence are less informative. They show their full strength in measurement processes. Then the measured values satisfy the respective conservation laws in any individual experiment. Let me remind you of spin measurements on a system of two spin-½ particles, being in a state with zero total spin, which we used in Section 5.5 to illustrate the EPR paradox. The spin components, with respect to an arbitrarily chosen direction, of the two particles are indefinite; however, measuring them yields definite values (+½ or −½) that add up to zero, thus confirming the angular conservation law. In the following, we will consider some realistic experiments for which conservation laws provide a simple explanation. Energy and momentum conservation For an understanding of the interaction between matter and radiation, Einstein's photon concept (actually, he spoke of ‘light quanta’) proved to be very helpful. He assumed photons to be particle-like constituents of electromagnetic radiation, in particular light. They have the energy h ν, where ν is the frequency of the radiation field. (Since the electromagnetic spectrum extends over an extremely wide range, there is a huge number of different sorts of photons.) The crucial point is that photons are generated or annihilated only as a whole. This property gives rise to typical quantum effects.
The previous chapter surveyed part of the rich variety of physical phenomena that can be understood using the ideas of quantum physics. Now that we are beginning the task of looking more deeply into the subject we shall find it useful to concentrate on examples that are comparatively simple to understand but which still illustrate the fundamental principles and highlight the basic conceptual problems. Some years ago most writers discussing such topics would probably have turned to the example of a ‘particle’ passing through a two-slit apparatus (as in Figure 1.2), whose wave properties are revealed in the interference pattern. Much of the discussion would have been in terms of wave–particle duality and the problems involved in position and momentum measurements, as in the discussion of the uncertainty principle in the last chapter. However, there are essentially an infinite number of places where the particle can be and an infinite number of possible values of its momentum, and this complicates the discussion considerably. We can illustrate all the points of principle we want to discuss by considering situations where a measurement has only a small number of possible outcomes. One such quantity relating to the physics of light beams and photons is known as polarisation . In the next section we discuss it in the context of the classical wave theory of light, and the rest of the chapter extends the concept to situations where the photon nature of light is important.
The previous chapter surveyed part of the rich variety of physical phenomena that can be understood using the ideas of quantum physics. Now that we are beginning the task of looking more deeply into the subject we shall find it useful to concentrate on examples that are comparatively simple to understand but which still illustrate the fundamental principles and highlight the basic conceptual problems. Some years ago most writers discussing such topics would probably have turned to the example of a ‘particle’ passing through a two-slit apparatus (as in Figure 1.2), whose wave properties are revealed in the interference pattern. Much of the discussion would have been in terms of wave–particle duality and the problems involved in position and momentum measurements, as in the discussion of the uncertainty principle in the last chapter. However, there are essentially an infinite number of places where the particle can be and an infinite number of possible values of its momentum, and this complicates the discussion considerably. We can illustrate all the points of principle we want to discuss by considering situations where a measurement has only a small number of possible outcomes. One such quantity relating to the physics of light beams and photons is known as polarisation . In the next section we discuss it in the context of the classical wave theory of light, and the rest of the chapter extends the concept to situations where the photon nature of light is important.
How can we construct a picture of the photon from the wealth of observation material available to us? The photon appears to have a split personality: it is neither a wave nor a particle but something else which, depending on the experimental situation, exhibits a wave- or a particle-like behavior. In other words, in the photon (as in material particles such as the electron) the particle–wave dualism becomes manifest. Whereas classically the wave and the particle pictures are separate, quantum mechanics accomplishes a formal synthesis through a unified mathematical treatment. Let us look first at the wave aspect familiar from classical electrodynamics, which seems to be the most natural description. It makes all the different interference phenomena understandable, such as the “interference of the photon with itself” on the one hand and the appearance of spatial and temporal intensity correlations in a thermal radiation field on the other (which are obviously brought about by superposition of elementary waves emitted independently from different atoms). It might come as a surprise (at least for those having quantum mechanical preconceptions) that the classical theory is valid down to arbitrarily small intensities: the visibility of the interference pattern does not deteriorate even for very small intensities – the zero point fluctuations of the electromagnetic field advocated by quantum mechanics do not have a disturbing effect – and is valid not only for conventional interference experiments but also for interference between independently generated light beams (in the form of laser light).
In this chapter we shall be using the formalism of Chapter 4 to describe some properties of the quantized free electromagnetic field, emphasizing the analogies and differences with classical electromagnetism. The analogies explain why classical optics was so successful, to the extent that, even though light was not quantized, it was able to describe almost all known optical phenomena up until the 1970s. The differences highlight typical quantum behaviour, with no classical equivalent, which lies at the heart of modern quantum optics. The chapter begins by presenting formal ways of describing the main components of quantum optics experiments, namely, photodetectors and semi-reflecting mirrors. One can then understand homodyne detection, used to measure field quadrature components, even at optical frequencies for which no detector is fast enough to follow the oscillations of the field itself. Section 5.2 deals with the quantum vacuum where, in contrast to the classical vacuum, radiation has properties, in particular, fluctuations, with which one can associate physical effects. We then discuss in Section 5.3 some quantum radiation states in the simple case where a single mode l of the field is excited (non-vacuum). We introduce the idea of a quasiclassical state, or coherent state, used to make the link with classical optics. We shall also study other states, those with a definite number of photons, or squeezed states, which exhibit typically quantum properties, quite inconceivable in classical electromagnetism, and we shall show how these properties can be understood by reference to the Heisenberg relations, with an extremely useful graphical representation.
Historically, the scientific exploration of new phenomena has often been guided by systematic studies of observations, i.e., experimentally verifiable facts, which can be used as the basis to construct the underlying physical laws. As the apex of the investigations, one tries to identify the minimal set of fundamental assumptions – referred to as the axioms – needed to describe correctly the experimental observations. Even though the axioms form the basis to predict the system's behavior completely, they themselves have no rigorous derivation or interpretation. Thus, the axioms must be viewed as the elementary postulates that allow us to formulate a systematic description of the studied system based on well-defined logical reasoning. Even though it might seem unsatisfactory that axioms cannot be “derived,” one has to acknowledge the paramount power of well-postulated axioms to predict even the most exotic effects. As is well known, the theory of classical mechanics can be constructed using only the three Newtonian axioms. On this basis, an infinite variety of phenomena can be explained, ranging from the cyclic planetary motion all the way to the classical chaos. In this book, we are mainly interested in understanding how the axioms of classical and quantum mechanics can be applied to obtain a systematic description for the phenomena of interest. Especially, we want to understand how many-particle systems can be modeled, how quantum features of light emerge, and how these two aspects can be combined and utilized to explore new intriguing phenomena in semiconductor quantum optics.