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

Journal of Modern Physics

Quantum Interference without Wave-Particle Duality

Román Castañeda, Gioṙgio Matteucci, Raffaella Capelli

Published Jan 1, 2016• 13 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Interference of light and material particles is described with a unified model which does not need to assume the wave-particle duality. A moving particle is associated with a region of spatial correlated points named coherence cone. Its geometry depends on photon or particle momentum and on the parameters of the experimental setup. The final interference pattern is explained as a spatial distribution of particles caused by the coherence cone geometry. In the present context, the wave front superposition principle, wave-particle duality and wave-collapse lose their meaning. Fits of observed single electron and single molecule interference patterns together with the simulation of expected near-field molecule interference (Talbot carpet) demonstrate the model validity.

DOI
10.4236/jmp.2016.74038

Related papers

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

Is the wave superposition necessary for the interference phenomenology?

Román Castañeda

The wave superposition is considered the phenomenological principle of light interference, as well as an accurate procedure to calculate the quantum probability of the buildup of single matter particle interference patterns.However, it cannot provide a unified phenomenological framework to explain both types of interference.In this paper, a unified framework is proposed which leads to a unique principle for interference of both light waves and single matter particles.It is shown that the term interference denotes the confinement of the light irradiance or the single matter particles in spatially structured Lorentzian wells, due to the geometric potential determined by the prepared non-locality at the mask plane.This new description does not resort to the assumption of wave superposition, so that the setup configuration plays the main role.

Optica Pura y Aplicada•Mar 28, 2022•1 citation

Quantum Interference: Wave–Particle Duality

Muhammad Suhail Zubairy

Young’s double-slit experiment played a crucial role in establishing the wave nature of light. In this chapter, the shocking result that incident electrons yield a similar interference pattern as that formed by light waves is described. It is shown that the only way the experimental results could be explained is via a wave function description of electrons. It is also shown that, in the same experiment, the interference fringes disappear if the which-path information becomes available. This is the essence of wave–particle duality. The first of the Einstein–Bohr debates on wave-particle duality and Bohr’s principle of complementarity in the double-slit experiment is also discussed. Also presented are the counterintuitive notions of delayed choice and quantum eraser effects showing how the availability or erasure of information generated in the future can affect how the data in the present can be interpreted.

Oxford University Press eBooks•May 7, 2020•0 citations

Summarizing what we know about the photon

Harry Paul

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).

Cambridge University Press eBooks•May 20, 2004•0 citations

Wave–particle duality

Muhammad Suhail Zubairy

Abstract Young’s double-slit experiment played a crucial role in establishing the wave nature of light. In this chapter, the shocking result that incident electrons yield a similar interference pattern as that formed by light waves is described. It is shown that the only way the experimental results could be explained is via a wavefunction description of electrons. It is also shown that the interference fringes disappear if the which-path information becomes available. This is the essence of wave–particle duality. The first of the Einstein–Bohr debates on wave–particle duality and Bohr’s principle of complementarity in the double-slit experiment are also discussed. The counterintuitive notions of delayed choice and quantum eraser effects showing how the availability or erasure of information generated in the future can affect how the data in the present can be interpreted are presented. Quantum interference is responsible for novel phenomena like interaction-free measurement and counterfactual communication.

•Sep 14, 2023•0 citations

On the wave-particle duality within the framework of modeling single-photon interference

Alexandr Petrovich Davydov, Tatiana Pavlovna Zlydneva

Abstract The general results of constructing and modeling the photon wave function in the coordinate representation in the framework of quantum mechanics are presented in order to explain single-photon interference phenomena, in particular Young’s experiment. The relevance of this function is emphasized in connection with modern single-photon and two-photon experiments. The necessity of replacing the explanation of obtaining coherent light sources using the concept of a train of supposedly real electromagnetic waves emitted by one atom, by the conditional emission by this atom of the photon wave function in the coordinate representation, which then experiences diffraction and interference, is substantiated. A single-photon wave function is simulated based on the consideration of the electric dipole radiation of an atom in classical electrodynamics, and a conclusion is drawn on the possibility to explain Young’s experiment. It is argued that although the photon wave function (as well as of particles having mass) is not a physical object, the application of this function significantly weakens the problem of wave-particle duality of light. It is assumed the “nature” of this function reflects the properties of a physical vacuum, but new experiments are required to clarify it.

Journal of Physics Conference Series•Dec 1, 2019•6 citations
Interference of light and material particles is described with a unified model which does not need to assume the wave-particle duality. A moving particle is associated with a region of spatial correlated points named coherence cone. Its geometry depends on photon or particle momentum and on the parameters of the experimental setup. The final interference pattern is explained as a spatial distribution of particles caused by the coherence cone geometry. In the present context, the wave front superposition principle, wave-particle duality and wave-collapse lose their meaning. Fits of observed single electron and single molecule interference patterns together with the simulation of expected near-field molecule interference (Talbot carpet) demonstrate the model validity.
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 wave superposition is considered the phenomenological principle of light interference, as well as an accurate procedure to calculate the quantum probability of the buildup of single matter particle interference patterns.However, it cannot provide a unified phenomenological framework to explain both types of interference.In this paper, a unified framework is proposed which leads to a unique principle for interference of both light waves and single matter particles.It is shown that the term interference denotes the confinement of the light irradiance or the single matter particles in spatially structured Lorentzian wells, due to the geometric potential determined by the prepared non-locality at the mask plane.This new description does not resort to the assumption of wave superposition, so that the setup configuration plays the main role.
Young’s double-slit experiment played a crucial role in establishing the wave nature of light. In this chapter, the shocking result that incident electrons yield a similar interference pattern as that formed by light waves is described. It is shown that the only way the experimental results could be explained is via a wave function description of electrons. It is also shown that, in the same experiment, the interference fringes disappear if the which-path information becomes available. This is the essence of wave–particle duality. The first of the Einstein–Bohr debates on wave-particle duality and Bohr’s principle of complementarity in the double-slit experiment is also discussed. Also presented are the counterintuitive notions of delayed choice and quantum eraser effects showing how the availability or erasure of information generated in the future can affect how the data in the present can be interpreted.
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).
Abstract Young’s double-slit experiment played a crucial role in establishing the wave nature of light. In this chapter, the shocking result that incident electrons yield a similar interference pattern as that formed by light waves is described. It is shown that the only way the experimental results could be explained is via a wavefunction description of electrons. It is also shown that the interference fringes disappear if the which-path information becomes available. This is the essence of wave–particle duality. The first of the Einstein–Bohr debates on wave–particle duality and Bohr’s principle of complementarity in the double-slit experiment are also discussed. The counterintuitive notions of delayed choice and quantum eraser effects showing how the availability or erasure of information generated in the future can affect how the data in the present can be interpreted are presented. Quantum interference is responsible for novel phenomena like interaction-free measurement and counterfactual communication.
Abstract The general results of constructing and modeling the photon wave function in the coordinate representation in the framework of quantum mechanics are presented in order to explain single-photon interference phenomena, in particular Young’s experiment. The relevance of this function is emphasized in connection with modern single-photon and two-photon experiments. The necessity of replacing the explanation of obtaining coherent light sources using the concept of a train of supposedly real electromagnetic waves emitted by one atom, by the conditional emission by this atom of the photon wave function in the coordinate representation, which then experiences diffraction and interference, is substantiated. A single-photon wave function is simulated based on the consideration of the electric dipole radiation of an atom in classical electrodynamics, and a conclusion is drawn on the possibility to explain Young’s experiment. It is argued that although the photon wave function (as well as of particles having mass) is not a physical object, the application of this function significantly weakens the problem of wave-particle duality of light. It is assumed the “nature” of this function reflects the properties of a physical vacuum, but new experiments are required to clarify it.