The 'graininess' in the energy content of light is reported in experiments ranging from the blackbody spectrum and photo-electric effect to revivals in the Jaynes-Cummings model. Laser shot noise and antibunching of correlations in resonance fluorescence signify a departure from continuous wave behavior for light. Such phenomena underlie the unique sense in which a photon is regarded as an indivisible particle, experimentally tied to the fact that a beam splitter does not split a single photon of a two-photon pair. We consider three arguments for indivisibility - quantization of energy, particle-like fluctuations, and which-way measurements. We argue that in each case, photon indivisibility is an inference based on energy conserving interactions where the detection mechanism involves countable electrons subject to space and bandwidth limitations. The indivisibility of the photon thus remains an open question, and one that we can use to probe the foundations of quantum electrodynamics.
The 'graininess' in the energy content of light is reported in experiments ranging from the blackbody spectrum and photo-electric effect to revivals in the Jaynes-Cummings model. Laser shot noise and antibunching of correlations in resonance fluorescence signify a departure from continuous wave behavior for light. Such phenomena underlie the unique sense in which a photon is regarded as an indivisible particle, experimentally tied to the fact that a beam splitter does not split a single photon of a two-photon pair. We consider three arguments for indivisibility - quantization of energy, particle-like fluctuations, and which-way measurements. We argue that in each case, photon indivisibility is an inference based on energy conserving interactions where the detection mechanism involves countable electrons subject to space and bandwidth limitations. The indivisibility of the photon thus remains an open question, and one that we can use to probe the foundations of quantum electrodynamics.
As low light detection technologies are advancing, novel experiments like single molecule spectroscopy, quantum computation, quantum encryption are proliferating. Quantum mechanical detectors can produce only discrete "clicks" at different rates based on the propagating field energy through them, irrespective of whether the photons are divisible or indivisible packets of energy. This is because electrons are quantized elementary particles and they are always bound in quantized energy levels in different quantum systems. Highly successful quantum formalism is not capable of providing the microscopic picture of the processes undergoing during QM interactions; that is left to human imaginations allowing for sustained controversies and mis-interpretations. This paper underscores the paradoxes that arise with the assumption that photons are indivisible elementary particles based on the obvious but generally ignored fact that EM fields do not operate on (interfere with) each other. Then we propose that atomic or molecular emissions emerge and propagate out as space and time finite classical wave packets. We also suggest experiments to validate that the amplitude of a photon wave packet can be split and combined by classical optical components using the specific example of an N-slit grating.
Experiments with single photons Central to the entire discipline of quantum optics, as should be evident from the preceding chapters, is the concept of the photon. Yet it is perhaps worthwhile to pause and ask: what is the evidence for the existence of photons? Most of us first encounter the photon concept in the context of the photo-electric effect. As we showed in Chapter 5, the photo-electric effect is, in fact, used to indirectly detect the presence of photons – the photo-electrons being the entities counted. But it turns out that some aspects of the photo-electric effect can be explained without introducing the concept of the photon. In fact, one can go quite far with a semiclassical theory in which only the atoms are quantized with the field treated classically. But we hasten to say that, for a satisfactory explanation of all aspects of the photo-electric effect, the field must be quantized. As it happens, the other venerable “proof” of the existence of photons, the Compton effect, can also be explained without quantized fields. In an attempt to obtain quantum effects with light, Taylor, in 1909, obtained interference fringes in an experiment with an extremely weak source of light. His source was a gas flame and the emitted light was attenuated by means of screens made of smoked glass.
Formulations for second and higher harmonic frequency up & down conversions, as well as multi photon processes directly assume summability and divisibility of photons. Quantum mechanical (QM) interpretations are completely congruent with these assumptions. However, for linear optical phenomena (interference, diffraction, refraction, material dispersion, spectral dispersion, etc.), we have a profound dichotomy. Most optical engineers innovate and analyze all optical instruments by propagating pure classical electromagnetic (EM) fields using Maxwell's equations and gives only 'lip-service' to the concept "indivisible light quanta". Further, irrespective of linearity or nonlinearity of the phenomena, the final results are always registered through some photo-electric or photo-chemical effects. This is mathematically well modeled by a quadratic action (energy absorption) relation. Since QM does not preclude divisibility or summability of photons in nonlinear & multi-photon effects, it cannot have any foundational reason against these same possibilities in linear optical phenomena. It implies that we must carefully revisit the fundamental roots behind all lightmatter interaction processes and understand the common origin of "graininess" and "discreteness' of light energy.
There are two opposing points of view on the nature of light: the first one manifests the wave-particle duality as a fundamental property of the nature; the second one claims that photons do not exist and the light is a continuous classical wave, while the so-called “quantum” properties of this field appear only as a result of its interaction with matter. In this paper we show that many quantum phenomena which are traditionally described by quantum electrodynamics can be described if light is considered within the limits of classical electrodynamics without quantization of radiation. These phenomena include the double-slit experiment, the photoelectric effect, the Compton effect, the Hanbury Brown and Twiss effect, the so-called multiphoton ionisation of atoms, etc. We show that this point of view allows also explaining the “wave-particle duality” of light in Wiener experiments with standing waves. We show that the Born rule for light can easily be derived from Fermi’s golden rule as an approximation for low-intense light or for short exposure time. We show that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle for “photons” has a simple classical sense and cannot be considered as a fundamental limitation of accuracy of simultaneous measurements of position and momentum or time and energy. We conclude that the concept of a “photon” is superfluous in explanation of light-matter interactions.
The history of the concept of the photon in twentieth-century physics is far from a simple story opening with Einstein’s vision of light as a collection of indivisible particles whose energy and momentum are conserved during its interaction with matter, and reaching closure with the wave-particle duality as an accomplishment of quantum mechanics. Since then there has been an intermittent debate on the need for and adequacy of such a concept, even if this debate has been absent from the literature on the history of physics and from physics teaching. This paper analyzes a major event which led to the revival of this debate, namely, the experiment carried out by Robert Hanbury Brown and Richard Quentin Twiss (HBT) in 1956 in the context of low-intensity interferometry. As part of their work to build a new kind of interferometer to measure the diameter of optical stars, their results seemed to suggest that photons split through two different channels and detectors. These results stirred up a debate involving Edward Purcell, Eric Brannen, Harry Ferguson, Peter Fellgett, Richard Sillitto, Lajos Jánossy, Leonard Mandel, and Emil Wolf, in addition to Hanbury Brown and Twiss themselves. The building of this device in astronomy thus renewed the old controversy about the nature of light. Later on, with the invention of lasers, the HBT experimental results played a role in developments leading to the creation of quantum optics and currently play a role in various fields in physics.
Arguments in physics regarding light are often based on either mechanistic concepts, or on a "which way" discussion where the question of "indistinguishability" is crucial. The last kind of arguing is based on the concept of an indivisible, point-like photon, a concept stemming historically from the most common explanation of the photoelectric effect. There seems, however, to be an important lack of consistency between arguing based on indivisible particle-like photons and the actual quantum formalism for calculating detailed outcomes from various experiments. Crucial parts of the actual calculations of diffraction and interference phenomena seem in fact to be very similar in the classical and the quantum descriptions, and are based either on classic electromagnetic fields, or on quantum fields. It is the interpretations that differ. It would be interesting to downgrade the concept of an indivisible particle-like photon and upgrade the importance of the quantum field description we really use in the detailed calculations. It is our impression that we by that could avoid quite a few weird conclusions we live with today. A few examples are given.