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

ISRN Mathematical Analysis

Quantum Histories and Quantum Complementarity

Danko Dimchev Georgiev

Published Jan 26, 2012• 3 citations
Publisher

Abstract

We discuss the origin of quantum complementarity using Feynman's sum-over-histories approach to Quantum Mechanics (QM). We analyze two experimental setups introduced by W. G. Unruh and S. Afshar and show how one should consistently calculate the existence of which-way information using interfering quantum histories. Then we discuss the possible problems associated with the notion of which way information and provide an explanation why Englert-Greenberger duality relation cannot be violated experimentally if the standard QM postulates are accepted.

DOI
10.5402/2012/327278

Related papers

No Paradox in Wave–Particle Duality

Andrew Knight

The assertion that an experiment by Afshar et al. demonstrates violation of Bohr’s Principle of Complementarity is based on the faulty assumption that which-way information in a double-slit interference experiment can be retroactively determined from a future measurement.

•Jan 1, 2020•3 citations

Entanglement and quantum interference

Paul O’Hara

In the history of quantum mechanics, much has been written about the double-slit experiment, and much debate as to its interpretation has ensued. Indeed, to explain the interference patterns for sub-atomic particles, explanations have been given not only in terms of the principle of complementarity and wave-particle duality but also in terms of quantum consciousness and parallel universes. In this paper, the topic will be discussed from the perspective of spin-coupling in the hope of further clarification. We will also suggest that this explanation allows for a realist interpretation of the Afshar Experiment.

arXiv:quant-ph/0608202•Aug 26, 2006•1 citation

Quantification of complementarity in multiqubit systems

Xinhua Peng, Xiwen Zhu, Dieter Suter +3 more

Complementarity was originally introduced as a qualitative concept for the discussion of properties of quantum mechanical objects that are classically incompatible. More recently, complementarity has become a quantitative relation between classically incompatible properties, such as the visibility of interference fringes and ``which-way'' information, but also between purely quantum mechanical properties, such as measures of entanglement. We discuss different complementarity relations for systems of two-, three-, or $n$ qubits. Using nuclear magnetic resonance techniques, we have experimentally verified some of these complementarity relations in a two-qubit system.

arXiv:quant-ph/0507183•Physical Review A•Nov 16, 2005•56 citations

THE PHYSICS OF QUANTUM INFORMATION: COMPLEMENTARITY, UNCERTAINTY, AND ENTANGLEMENT

Joseph M. Renes

Complementarity is one of the central mysteries of quantum mechanics, dramatically illustrated by the wave-particle duality in Young's double-slit experiment, and famously regarded by Feynman as "impossible, absolutely impossible to describe classically, [and] which has in it the heart of quantum mechanics" (emphasis original).1 The overarching goal of this thesis is to demonstrate that complementarity is also at the heart of quantum information theory, that it allows us to make (some) sense of just what information "quantum information" refers to, and that it is useful in understanding and constructing quantum information processing protocols.

arXiv:1212.2379•International Journal of Quantum Information•Dec 1, 2013•14 citations

Quantum twist to complementarity: A duality relation

Tabish Qureshi

Some recent works have introduced a quantum twist to the concept of complementarity, exemplified by a setup in which the which-way detector is in a superposition of being present and absent. It has been argued that such experiments allow measurement of particle-like and wave-like behavior at the same time. Here, we derive an inequality which puts a bound on the visibility of interference and the amount of which-way information that one can obtain, in the context of such modified experiments. As the wave aspect can only be revealed by an ensemble of detections, we argue that, in such experiments, a single detection can contribute only to one subensemble, corresponding to either wave aspect or particle aspect. This way, each detected particle behaves either as particle or as wave, never both, and Bohr's complementarity is fully respected.

arXiv:1205.2207•Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics•Apr 1, 2013•10 citations

3 On the Consistency of the Consistent Histories Approach to Quantum Mechanics

Elias Okon, Daniel Sudarsky

Abstract: The Consistent Histories (CH) formalism aims at a quantum mechani-cal framework which could be applied even to the universe as a whole. CH stresses the importance of histories for quantum mechanics, as opposed to measurements, and maintains that a satisfactory formulation of quantum mechanics allows one to assign probabilities to alternative histories of a quantum system. It further proposes that each realm, that is, each set of histories to which probabilities can be assigned, provides a valid quantum-mechanical account, but that different realms can be mutually incom-patible. Finally, some of its proponents offer an “evolutionary ” explanation of our existence in the universe and of our preference for quasiclassical descriptions of nature. The present work questions the validity of claims offered by CH proponents asserting that it solves many interpretational problems in quantum mechanics. In particular, we point out that the interpretation of the framework leaves vague two crucial points, namely, whether realms are fixed or chosen and the link between measurements and histories. Our claim is that by doing so, CH overlooks the main interpretational prob-lems of quantum mechanics. Furthermore, we challenge the evolutionary explanation offered and we critically examine the proposed notion of a realm-dependent reality. 1

•Jan 11, 2013•29 citations
We discuss the origin of quantum complementarity using Feynman's sum-over-histories approach to Quantum Mechanics (QM). We analyze two experimental setups introduced by W. G. Unruh and S. Afshar and show how one should consistently calculate the existence of which-way information using interfering quantum histories. Then we discuss the possible problems associated with the notion of which way information and provide an explanation why Englert-Greenberger duality relation cannot be violated experimentally if the standard QM postulates are accepted.
In the history of quantum mechanics, much has been written about the double-slit experiment, and much debate as to its interpretation has ensued. Indeed, to explain the interference patterns for sub-atomic particles, explanations have been given not only in terms of the principle of complementarity and wave-particle duality but also in terms of quantum consciousness and parallel universes. In this paper, the topic will be discussed from the perspective of spin-coupling in the hope of further clarification. We will also suggest that this explanation allows for a realist interpretation of the Afshar Experiment.
Complementarity was originally introduced as a qualitative concept for the discussion of properties of quantum mechanical objects that are classically incompatible. More recently, complementarity has become a quantitative relation between classically incompatible properties, such as the visibility of interference fringes and ``which-way'' information, but also between purely quantum mechanical properties, such as measures of entanglement. We discuss different complementarity relations for systems of two-, three-, or nnn qubits. Using nuclear magnetic resonance techniques, we have experimentally verified some of these complementarity relations in a two-qubit system.
Complementarity is one of the central mysteries of quantum mechanics, dramatically illustrated by the wave-particle duality in Young's double-slit experiment, and famously regarded by Feynman as "impossible, absolutely impossible to describe classically, [and] which has in it the heart of quantum mechanics" (emphasis original).1 The overarching goal of this thesis is to demonstrate that complementarity is also at the heart of quantum information theory, that it allows us to make (some) sense of just what information "quantum information" refers to, and that it is useful in understanding and constructing quantum information processing protocols.
Some recent works have introduced a quantum twist to the concept of complementarity, exemplified by a setup in which the which-way detector is in a superposition of being present and absent. It has been argued that such experiments allow measurement of particle-like and wave-like behavior at the same time. Here, we derive an inequality which puts a bound on the visibility of interference and the amount of which-way information that one can obtain, in the context of such modified experiments. As the wave aspect can only be revealed by an ensemble of detections, we argue that, in such experiments, a single detection can contribute only to one subensemble, corresponding to either wave aspect or particle aspect. This way, each detected particle behaves either as particle or as wave, never both, and Bohr's complementarity is fully respected.
Abstract: The Consistent Histories (CH) formalism aims at a quantum mechani-cal framework which could be applied even to the universe as a whole. CH stresses the importance of histories for quantum mechanics, as opposed to measurements, and maintains that a satisfactory formulation of quantum mechanics allows one to assign probabilities to alternative histories of a quantum system. It further proposes that each realm, that is, each set of histories to which probabilities can be assigned, provides a valid quantum-mechanical account, but that different realms can be mutually incom-patible. Finally, some of its proponents offer an “evolutionary ” explanation of our existence in the universe and of our preference for quasiclassical descriptions of nature. The present work questions the validity of claims offered by CH proponents asserting that it solves many interpretational problems in quantum mechanics. In particular, we point out that the interpretation of the framework leaves vague two crucial points, namely, whether realms are fixed or chosen and the link between measurements and histories. Our claim is that by doing so, CH overlooks the main interpretational prob-lems of quantum mechanics. Furthermore, we challenge the evolutionary explanation offered and we critically examine the proposed notion of a realm-dependent reality. 1