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

American Journal of Physics

Physical and unphysical phases of uniformly accelerated particles

Christophe Blondel, S. Berge, Christian Delsart

Published Jul 1, 2001• 10 citations
Publisher

Abstract

The motion of an electron in a uniform electric field, as in free fall, is characterized by the existence of pairs of trajectories that rejoin on the same final point. The corresponding interference pattern was first observed in 1996, and explained by the elementary model of uniform acceleration starting from a motionless electron source. In the experiment, however, the electron source is a fast-moving negative ion, which makes direct application of the model questionable. Relativistic arguments can be used to ascertain that no phase changes are actually produced by the motion of the source. The quantum phase of the electron can also be checked all along its two interfering trajectories. This method, which produces the same reassuring result as relativity, gives us the opportunity to revisit the relativistic transformation of the Schrödinger phase. It also makes it possible to calculate the effect of an acceleration of both the free electron and the electron emitter. Only in this case is a change of the interference pattern expected, but it is quantitatively negligible in the actual experiment.

DOI
10.1119/1.1356057

Related papers

A Matter-Wave Quantum Superposition of Inertial and Constant Acceleration Motions

Vlatko Vedral

We present three different methods of calculating the non-relativistic dynamics of a quantum matter-wave evolving in a superposition of the inertial and accelerated motions. The relative phase between the two, which is classically unobservable as it is a gauge transformation, can be detected in a matter-wave interference experiment. The first method is the most straightforward and it represents the evolution as an exponential of the Hamiltonian. Based on the Heisenberg picture, the second method is insightful because it gives us extra insight into the independence of the wave-packet spreading of the magnitude of acceleration. Also, it demonstrates that the Heisenberg picture is perfectly suited to capturing all aspects of quantum interference. The final method shows the consistency with the full relativistic treatment and we use it to make a point regarding the equivalence principle.

arXiv:2502.16716•Feb 23, 2025•0 citations

Quantum effects of electric fields and potentials on electron motion: an introduction to theoretical and practical aspects

G Matteucci

In the so-called electric Aharonov-Bohm effect, a quantum interference pattern shift is produced when electrons move in an electric field-free region but, at the same time, under the presence of a time-dependent electric potential. Analogous fringe shifts are observed in interference experiments where electrons, travelling through an electrostatic field, suffer a classical lag effect produced by electric forces. Since these experiments are reported mainly in specialized journals, it could be rather difficult and time consuming for a student to attain a comprehensive overview of the subject. Therefore, particular attention has been addressed to reviewing the theory, to describing a couple of experiments and to the interpretation of the results. We believe that students can be suitably introduced to exploring the “paradoxical” aspects of the interaction of electrons with electric potentials and fields.

European Journal of Physics•May 15, 2007•2 citations

Quantum Interference without Quantum Mechanics

Arend Niehaus

A recently proposed model of the Dirac electron, which has been shown to describe several observed properties of the particle correctly, is in the present paper shown to be also able to explain quantum interference by classical probabilities. According to this model, the electron is not point-like, but rather an “entity with structure”, formed by a fast periodic motion of a “light-like object”, whose momentum (p) causes the angular momentum responsible for the spin, and whose energy (E = pc) is equal to the energy of the electron, mc2. A qualitative description of the model is given, together with the quantitative formulae that allow to discuss interference. Applied to the experimental situation of the “two-slit” experiment, the formulae yield the same time dependence of the detection probability as the quantum mechanical treatment, and hence the same interference pattern. In contrast to quantum mechanics, the pattern is due to “particle interference” rather than to “wave interference”. No wave-particle paradox arises. The merits of the model are summarized, and its physical content discussed.

arXiv:1804.00496•Journal of Modern Physics•Jan 1, 2019•3 citations

Unlocking the Mystery of Interference Patterns in Electron and Photon Double-Slit Experiments and the Puzzle of ‘Waves Without Medium’

Henok Tadesse

The formidable problem with double-slit experiments is: if electrons and photons exhibit wave properties (seen as interference patterns), then what is waving? What is the medium for transmission of ‘electron waves’? Such a medium has been disproved experimentally, in the case of the photon, and not even conceivable for the electron. Erwin Schrodinger was on the right track with his view of the electron as a ‘smeared’ object, rather than as a point particle. Then how is a wave possible without a medium? How can a wave property and a particle property co-exist in a single physical entity (wave- particle duality)? Nature uses a simple and subtle trick : the average electron mass density at a given region of space is directly proportional to the root mean square (RMS) intensity of oscillation (velocity) of the electron (the electron wave) in that region. The instantaneous mass density of the electron at a given point is directly proportional to the instantaneous magnitude of vibrational velocity of the electron at that point. The average photon energy density in a given region of space is directly proportional to the root mean square of rate of change of the electric and magnetic fields in that region. The instantaneous energy density of the photon at a given point of space and time is directly proportional to the magnitude of rate of change of the electric and magnetic fields at that point. The rate of change of electric and magnetic fields in turn depends on the frequency, amplitude and phase of the wave. The electron mass and photon energy will always be concentrated at regions of high wave amplitude. This means that the electron and the photon are dragged by their respective waves. The new theory provides a hint on the mystery behind Planck’s relation: E=h.f. Higher frequency photons have higher energy than lower frequency photons just because higher frequency photons also have higher amplitudes of electric and magnetic field oscillations. If we assume that ordinary waves also have the same fundamental properties as electron waves, then we may be able to explain the lack of backward propagation in Huygens’ principle. We may be able to explain why the bouncing oil droplet in the Couder-Fort oil bath experiment starts to go in the direction of the wave propagation.

•Nov 1, 2014•0 citations

On a new prediction of Causal Quantum Mechanics for the two-slit interference experiment with electrons

Eduardo Sergio Santini, Germán M. Chiappe, González, Rafael

The causal quantum mechanics (i.e. Bohmian or de Broglie-Bohm or Bohm-de Broglie quantum mechanics) has made possible to calculate the trajectories of electrons in a typical double-slit experiment [C. Philippidis et al., Il Nuovo Cimento, 52 B, 15-28 (1979)]. The trajectories do not correspond to an uniform movement but to an accelerated one. The acceleration is caused by the quantum potential. From the quantum theoretical point of view, there is a probability for the electron to emit photons, with a certain emission power, during its movement from the slits to the screen. We find a quantum general formula for the emission power of photons, valid independently of the interpretation. Then, according to the Copenhagen interpretation, this formula gives a strictly zero value for the emission power because the electron moves as a free particle after it leaves the slit and before reach the screen. Then, there is no emission of photons. In the case of the causal interpretation, the emission power results, for a concrete real experiment, in a very tiny but not a zero value, driven by the square of the quantum potential gradient. We give an idea of the type of spectrum that could be measured. A brief idea of a possible experimental arrangement in order to detect this effect, is given.

arXiv:1801.02096•Jan 6, 2018•0 citations

Quantum mechanical time-development operator for the uniformly accelerated particle

Richard W. Robinett

We derive a useful expression for the time-development operator for quantum wave functions, exp(−iĤt/ℏ), for the case of a particle subject to a constant force. We apply it, in both position and momentum space, to construct wave packets that exhibit uniform acceleration. We use these results to generate quantum wave packets corresponding to the motion of a charged particle in a uniform electric field in two different gauges, explicitly demonstrating the change in phase of the wave function under a gauge transformation. The more standard description of the time dependence of accelerating wave packets using the formalism of propagators is briefly reviewed in an Appendix for comparison.

American Journal of Physics•Jun 1, 1996•44 citations
The motion of an electron in a uniform electric field, as in free fall, is characterized by the existence of pairs of trajectories that rejoin on the same final point. The corresponding interference pattern was first observed in 1996, and explained by the elementary model of uniform acceleration starting from a motionless electron source. In the experiment, however, the electron source is a fast-moving negative ion, which makes direct application of the model questionable. Relativistic arguments can be used to ascertain that no phase changes are actually produced by the motion of the source. The quantum phase of the electron can also be checked all along its two interfering trajectories. This method, which produces the same reassuring result as relativity, gives us the opportunity to revisit the relativistic transformation of the Schrödinger phase. It also makes it possible to calculate the effect of an acceleration of both the free electron and the electron emitter. Only in this case is a change of the interference pattern expected, but it is quantitatively negligible in the actual experiment.
We present three different methods of calculating the non-relativistic dynamics of a quantum matter-wave evolving in a superposition of the inertial and accelerated motions. The relative phase between the two, which is classically unobservable as it is a gauge transformation, can be detected in a matter-wave interference experiment. The first method is the most straightforward and it represents the evolution as an exponential of the Hamiltonian. Based on the Heisenberg picture, the second method is insightful because it gives us extra insight into the independence of the wave-packet spreading of the magnitude of acceleration. Also, it demonstrates that the Heisenberg picture is perfectly suited to capturing all aspects of quantum interference. The final method shows the consistency with the full relativistic treatment and we use it to make a point regarding the equivalence principle.
In the so-called electric Aharonov-Bohm effect, a quantum interference pattern shift is produced when electrons move in an electric field-free region but, at the same time, under the presence of a time-dependent electric potential. Analogous fringe shifts are observed in interference experiments where electrons, travelling through an electrostatic field, suffer a classical lag effect produced by electric forces. Since these experiments are reported mainly in specialized journals, it could be rather difficult and time consuming for a student to attain a comprehensive overview of the subject. Therefore, particular attention has been addressed to reviewing the theory, to describing a couple of experiments and to the interpretation of the results. We believe that students can be suitably introduced to exploring the “paradoxical” aspects of the interaction of electrons with electric potentials and fields.
A recently proposed model of the Dirac electron, which has been shown to describe several observed properties of the particle correctly, is in the present paper shown to be also able to explain quantum interference by classical probabilities. According to this model, the electron is not point-like, but rather an “entity with structure”, formed by a fast periodic motion of a “light-like object”, whose momentum (p) causes the angular momentum responsible for the spin, and whose energy (E = pc) is equal to the energy of the electron, mc2. A qualitative description of the model is given, together with the quantitative formulae that allow to discuss interference. Applied to the experimental situation of the “two-slit” experiment, the formulae yield the same time dependence of the detection probability as the quantum mechanical treatment, and hence the same interference pattern. In contrast to quantum mechanics, the pattern is due to “particle interference” rather than to “wave interference”. No wave-particle paradox arises. The merits of the model are summarized, and its physical content discussed.
The formidable problem with double-slit experiments is: if electrons and photons exhibit wave properties (seen as interference patterns), then what is waving? What is the medium for transmission of ‘electron waves’? Such a medium has been disproved experimentally, in the case of the photon, and not even conceivable for the electron. Erwin Schrodinger was on the right track with his view of the electron as a ‘smeared’ object, rather than as a point particle. Then how is a wave possible without a medium? How can a wave property and a particle property co-exist in a single physical entity (wave- particle duality)? Nature uses a simple and subtle trick : the average electron mass density at a given region of space is directly proportional to the root mean square (RMS) intensity of oscillation (velocity) of the electron (the electron wave) in that region. The instantaneous mass density of the electron at a given point is directly proportional to the instantaneous magnitude of vibrational velocity of the electron at that point. The average photon energy density in a given region of space is directly proportional to the root mean square of rate of change of the electric and magnetic fields in that region. The instantaneous energy density of the photon at a given point of space and time is directly proportional to the magnitude of rate of change of the electric and magnetic fields at that point. The rate of change of electric and magnetic fields in turn depends on the frequency, amplitude and phase of the wave. The electron mass and photon energy will always be concentrated at regions of high wave amplitude. This means that the electron and the photon are dragged by their respective waves. The new theory provides a hint on the mystery behind Planck’s relation: E=h.f. Higher frequency photons have higher energy than lower frequency photons just because higher frequency photons also have higher amplitudes of electric and magnetic field oscillations. If we assume that ordinary waves also have the same fundamental properties as electron waves, then we may be able to explain the lack of backward propagation in Huygens’ principle. We may be able to explain why the bouncing oil droplet in the Couder-Fort oil bath experiment starts to go in the direction of the wave propagation.
The causal quantum mechanics (i.e. Bohmian or de Broglie-Bohm or Bohm-de Broglie quantum mechanics) has made possible to calculate the trajectories of electrons in a typical double-slit experiment [C. Philippidis et al., Il Nuovo Cimento, 52 B, 15-28 (1979)]. The trajectories do not correspond to an uniform movement but to an accelerated one. The acceleration is caused by the quantum potential. From the quantum theoretical point of view, there is a probability for the electron to emit photons, with a certain emission power, during its movement from the slits to the screen. We find a quantum general formula for the emission power of photons, valid independently of the interpretation. Then, according to the Copenhagen interpretation, this formula gives a strictly zero value for the emission power because the electron moves as a free particle after it leaves the slit and before reach the screen. Then, there is no emission of photons. In the case of the causal interpretation, the emission power results, for a concrete real experiment, in a very tiny but not a zero value, driven by the square of the quantum potential gradient. We give an idea of the type of spectrum that could be measured. A brief idea of a possible experimental arrangement in order to detect this effect, is given.
We derive a useful expression for the time-development operator for quantum wave functions, exp(−iĤt/ℏ), for the case of a particle subject to a constant force. We apply it, in both position and momentum space, to construct wave packets that exhibit uniform acceleration. We use these results to generate quantum wave packets corresponding to the motion of a charged particle in a uniform electric field in two different gauges, explicitly demonstrating the change in phase of the wave function under a gauge transformation. The more standard description of the time dependence of accelerating wave packets using the formalism of propagators is briefly reviewed in an Appendix for comparison.