Cambridge University Press eBooks

Interference, superposition and wave packet collapse

Guido Bacciagaluppi, Antony Valentini

Published Oct 22, 2009• 0 citations

Abstract

Probability and interference According to Feynman, single-particle interference is ‘the only mystery’ of quantum theory (Feynman, Leighton and Sands 1965, ch. 1, p. 1). Feynman considered an experiment in which particles are fired, one at a time, towards a screen with two holes labelled 1 and 2. With both holes open, the distribution P 12 of particles at the backstop displays an oscillatory pattern of bright and dark fringes. If P 1 is the distribution with only hole 1 open, and P 2 is the distribution with only hole 2 open, then experimentally it is found that P 12 ≠ P 1 + P 2 . According to the argument given by Feynman (as well as by many other authors), this result is inexplicable by ‘classical’ reasoning. By his presentation of the two-slit experiment (as well as by his development of the path-integral formulation of quantum theory), Feynman popularised the idea that the usual probability calculus breaks down in the presence of quantum interference, where it is probability amplitudes (and not probabilities themselves) that are to be added. As pointed out by Koopman (1955), and by Ballentine (1986), this argument is mistaken: the probability distributions at the backstop – P 12 , P 1 and P 2 – are conditional probabilities with three distinct conditions (both slits open, one or other slit closed), and probability calculus does not imply any relationship between these. Feynman's argument notwithstanding, standard probability calculus is perfectly consistent with the two-slit experiment.

DOI: 10.1017/cbo9781139194983.007

Related papers

Quantum Optics and Informatics

Davıd L. Andrews, David S. Bradshaw

3.1 Interference of a Single Photon The kinds of study originally conducted by Thomas Young - in particular, the celebrated "double slit" experiment that we briefly examined in Chapter 1 (see Fig. 1) - provide a capacity to reveal far more than the wave nature of light, important as that is. True enough, the observed characteristic fringe pattern, when monochromatic light passes through two closely spaced slits onto a screen, appears to be simply explicable on the basis of waves from each slit undergoing constructive and destructive interference at different positions on the screen. Yet, astonishingly, these patterns of interference are still exhibited when individual photons of a low-intensity input beam reach the screen one at a time, showing that it cannot in fact be a matter of different photons having to interfere with each other. Indeed, Dirac enunciated the general principle that photons can never directly interact with each other. The double slit and other such experiments indicate that each photon interacts in a delocalized, wave-like manner with both slits at the same time. Successive experiments build interference patterns that conform to an exact mathematical distribution formula, but the position at which an individual photon is detected in any particular instance cannot be predicted; this is a quintessential illustration of quantum uncertainty. Using the path integral approach of quantum theory, the phenomenon is more accurately represented by introducing a summation over all possible routes between the source and the screen on which the pattern appears, signifying an entire "lifetime" for each photon involved in the experiment. This relates to the fact that the actual trajectory is unknown without an observation, and thus we only obtain the probabilities of the photon striking the screen at different positions and times; all trajectories (potentialities) must be considered in a superposition. Each route is considered equally probable, and the variation in phase produces quantum interference. The differences in phase of each trajectory, at varying positions on the screen, generates the fringe pattern. An intriguing variation on this experiment involves "marking" the photons so that the actual route of each photon to the screen is known. Remarkably, in such a case, the fringe patterns do not appear because quantum interference cannot occur. A consequence of the observation of the photon route is an effect that, in other quantum mechanical connections, is known as a collapse of the wavefunction. However, it is possible for the fringe patterns to reappear when information on the route of the photons is lost; this is known as a quantum eraser.

SPIE eBooksAug 1, 20180 citations

Nonclassical Paths in Quantum Interference Experiments

Rahul Sawant, Joseph Samuel, Aninda Sinha +2 more

In a double slit interference experiment, the wave function at the screen with both slits open is not exactly equal to the sum of the wave functions with the slits individually open one at a time. The three scenarios represent three different boundary conditions and as such, the superposition principle should not be applicable. However, most well-known text books in quantum mechanics implicitly and/or explicitly use this assumption that is only approximately true. In our present study, we have used the Feynman path integral formalism to quantify contributions from nonclassical paths in quantum interference experiments that provide a measurable deviation from a naive application of the superposition principle. A direct experimental demonstration for the existence of these nonclassical paths is difficult to present. We find that contributions from such paths can be significant and we propose simple three-slit interference experiments to directly confirm their existence.

arXiv:1308.2022Physical Review LettersSep 19, 201494 citations

The Double-Slit Experiment Reinterpreted: Matter-Wave Propagation and the Physical Mechanism of Quantum Interference

YOUNG HO GOH

The double-slit experiment has stood for a century as the paradigmatic demonstration of quantum superposition: the standard interpretation holds that a particle passes through both slits simultaneously, existing in a superposition of two spatially separated states. This paper proposes a physically distinct alternative: the particle's matter wave — a real physical wave propagating through space in accordance with de Broglie's relation λ = h/p — passes through both slits, while the particle itself (matter) remains in an undetermined state until a constructive interference maximum is formed at the detection screen. The particle does not simultaneously occupy two locations; the wave does. This distinction eliminates the need for superposition as an ontological commitment while fully reproducing the observed interference pattern. We further show that the disappearance of the interference pattern upon which-path measurement is explained without invoking wavefunction collapse: the measurement interaction redirects the matter wave to a single-slit geometry, eliminating the two-wave interference condition. Three experimentally testable predictions distinguish this framework from the standard interpretation: (1) weak-measurement trajectory reconstruction should reveal single particle paths inconsistent with simultaneous two-slit passage; (2) diffraction fringe spacing should depend on the mass density of the slit material, because denser slit edges generate a steeper refractive-index gradient for the matter wave; (3) the fringe pattern should exhibit a density-dependent phase shift measurable with current matter-wave interferometry technology. This reinterpretation requires no new mathematical formalism — the Schrödinger equation and Born's rule are retained — but replaces the ontological claim of simultaneous multi-location existence with the physically consistent picture of matter-wave propagation through an undetermined-state particle.

Apr 22, 20260 citations

Classical Probabilities and Bell' s Theorem

Tan Tian-rong

It is proved that: What the two-slit experiments have refuted is the preconceived idea that of the event that a micro particle passing through one slit arrives somewhere on the screen is irrelative to the condition that whether or not the other slit is open. Consideringaddition theorem of probabilities, the above idea can be expressed as follows: (a)Assum that a beam passes through a partition with two slit and arrives a screen. The of the event that an indivedual particle falls on somewhere of the screen under the condition that two slit open simultaneously, is equal to the sum of two of the same event under that two slit open in turn. Defining the experimental condition such as two slit open simultaneously or in turn as passage the proposition (a)is manifested as probabilities is independent of passage conditions. On the other hand, in terms of the above, superposition principle of in quantum mechanics ought to be indicated as probability amplitudes is independent of passage conditions. Correspondingly, (a)is named hereof as superposition presumption of probability. For lack of the conception of passage conditions, (a)is confused with theorem of probabilities. As a result, classical physics tacitly approve (a), and thereby it fails to comprehend the two-slit experiments. In reverse, to explain two-slit experiments, quantum mechanics spurns addition theorem of so that it meets with various difficults about explanation. Any alternative of quantum mechanics must be able to explain two-slit experiments, therefore it must contain passage conditions or amplitudes. But hidden variable theory Bell used dissatisfies such a prerequisite. It comes thus into conflict with experiment facts inevitably. As a result, Lochak's argument that Bell's inequality is irrelative to locality is rediscovered.

Journal of Changzhou Institute of TechnologyJan 1, 20020 citations

Interference Phenomena: Exploring the Essential Mystery

Frank S. Levin

Abstract Chapter 11 introduces the essential mystery of quantum mechanics, shows how it is resolved, and then goes on to examine related phenomena. The mystery is how individual photons, not electromagnetic waves, can give rise to the interference pattern seen in the two-slit experiment. They are shown to do so because the relevant quantum amplitude is a linear combination of two terms, leading to the pattern when neither slit is identified as the one the photon went through, but collapsing to one term and no pattern if the slit is identified. Similar results are shown to occur when individual electrons are incident on the two slits, and when large molecules, which have de Broglie wavelengths, are scattered by diffraction gratings. Many other interference experiments are described, including those where a photon was shown to be in two places simultaneously and one where a photon displayed both wave and particle features.

Sep 21, 20170 citations

Whirling waves in interference experiments

Rahul Sawant, Joseph Samuel, Aninda Sinha +2 more

In a double slit interference experiment, the wave function at the screen with both slits open is not exactly the sum of the wave functions with the slits individually open one at a time. The three scenarios represent three different boundary conditions and as such, the superposition principle should not be applicable. However, most well known text books in quantum mechanics implicitly and/or explicitly use this assumption, the wave function hypothesis, which is only approximately true. In our present study, we have used the Feynman path integral formalism to quantify contributions from non-classical paths in interference experiments which provide a measurable deviation from the wave function hypothesis. A direct experimental demonstration for the existence of these non-classical paths is hard. We find that contributions from such paths can be significant and we propose simple three-slit interference experiments to directly confirm their existence.

Aug 9, 20131 citation