Noninteraction of waves or the Non-Interaction of Waves property is common to all waves in the linear domain and in the absence of interacting materials. Autocorrelation between a pair of replicated fields to generate measurable changes implies some form of field–field interaction force, which has never been formally declared. Publications by Lamb, Jaynes, indicate that semiclassical theory is adequate to explain almost all the light–matter interaction phenomena. When one claims that he or she has registered a single photon “click,” what has really been measured in the instrument is a current pulse consisting of many billions of electrons through amplification of the light-induced emission of one or more starting electrons. Drawing a conclusion from current pulses that photons are indivisible quanta and each electron is released by a single indivisible light quantum does not demonstrate a one-to-one logical correlation.
Noninteraction of waves or the Non-Interaction of Waves property is common to all waves in the linear domain and in the absence of interacting materials. Autocorrelation between a pair of replicated fields to generate measurable changes implies some form of field–field interaction force, which has never been formally declared. Publications by Lamb, Jaynes, indicate that semiclassical theory is adequate to explain almost all the light–matter interaction phenomena. When one claims that he or she has registered a single photon “click,” what has really been measured in the instrument is a current pulse consisting of many billions of electrons through amplification of the light-induced emission of one or more starting electrons. Drawing a conclusion from current pulses that photons are indivisible quanta and each electron is released by a single indivisible light quantum does not demonstrate a one-to-one logical correlation.
In quantum mechanics, light cannot be described in terms of waves and particles at the same time. However, the question about light "as it really is" implies a description that is independent from the constraints of measurement. It is rather preferable to incorporate both aspects in a causal ontological theory, especially if it simplifies explanation and improves predictions. Hence, the photon can be described as an extended longitudinal association of discrete indivisible constituents, which are held together by the effect of their own waves on each other. The same waves can then be used to interpret the force of interactions between different pulses of light, or between light and matter. The concept of wavemediated interaction between sub-photonic entities is entirely consistent with the observations of quantum mechanics. The key is to assume that elementary sources of waves never collide, and that they have constant parameters. Novel experimental implications follow from this approach. For example, the speed of propagation of changes within magnetic or electrostatic fields may not be equal to the speed of light. Also, interference fringes should be detectable beyond the volume of overlap of two non-entangled beams, but only in special experimental settings.
The idea of the photon has stirred the imaginations of physicists ever since 1905 when Einstein originally proposed the use of light quanta to explain the photoelectric effect. This concept is formalized in the quantum theory of radiation, which has had unfailing success in explaining the interaction of electromagnetic radiation with matter, seemingly limited only by the ability of physicists to perform the indicated calculations. Nevertheless, it has its conceptual problems—various infinities and frequent misinterpretations. Consequently an increasing number of workers are asking, “to what extent is the quantized field really necessary and useful?” In fact the experimental results of the photoelectric effect were explained by G. Wentzel in 1927 without the quantum theory of radiation. Similarly most electro-optic phenomena such as stimulated emission, reaction of the emitted field on the emitting atom, resonance fluorescence, and so on, do not require the quantization of the field for their explanation. As we will see, these processes can all be quantitatively explained and physically understood in terms of the semiclassical theory of the matter–field interaction in which the electric field is treated classically while the atoms obey the laws of quantum mechanics. The quantized field is fundamentally required for accurate descriptions of certain processes involving fluctuations in the electromagnetic field: for example, spontaneous emission, the Lamb shift, the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron, and certain aspects of blackbody radiation. (The Compton effect also fits here, but see later under references 8b and c.) Here we will outline how the photon concept originated and developed, where it is not required and is often misused, and finally where it plays an essential role in the understanding of physical phenomena. In our discussion we will attempt to give a logically consistent definition of the word “photon”—a statement far more necessary than one might think, for so many contradictory uses exist of this elusive beast. In particular consider the original coining of the word by G. N. Lewis: “[because it appears to spend] only a minute fraction of its existence as a carrier of radiant energy, while the rest of the time it remains an important structural element within the atom…, I therefore take the liberty of proposing for this hypothetical new atom which is not light but plays an essential part in every process of radiation, the name photon!” (our exclamation point). Clearly the present usage of the word is very different.
In this introductory chapter we focus on the interaction of optical fields with matter because it forms the basis of signal amplification in all optical amplifiers. According to our present understanding, optical fields are made of photons with properties precisely described by the laws of quantum field theory [1]. One consequence of this wave–particle duality is that optical fields can be described, in certain cases, as electromagnetic waves using Maxwell's equations and, in other cases, as a stream of massless particles (photons) such that each photon contains an energy h ν, where h is the Planck constant and ν, is the frequency of the optical field. In the case of monochromatic light, it is easy to relate the number of photons contained in an electromagnetic field to its associated energy density. However, this becomes difficult for optical fields that have broad spectral features, unless full statistical features of the signal are known [2]. Fortunately, in most cases that we deal with, such a detailed knowledge of photon statistics is not necessary or even required [3, 4]. Both the linear and the nonlinear optical studies carried out during the last century have shown us convincingly that a theoretical understanding of experimental observations can be gained just by using wave features of the optical fields if they are intense enough to contain more than a few photons [5]. It is this semiclassical approach that we adopt in this book. In cases where such a description is not adequate, one could supplement the wave picture with a quantum description.
Although light quanta were known since the works by Planck and Einstein, for several decades after these works, there was no need to treat light quantum mechanically, and all experiments could be well explained using the quantum description of matter and classical description of light (the semiclassical approach). The situation changed with the development of sources of so-called nonclassical light, i.e., light whose properties cannot be understood in the framework of the semiclassical approach. Two simple examples can be given here. The first one is the suppression of shot noise in optical detectors. Shot noise, i.e., fluctuations of photocurrent scaling as the square root of the photocurrent mean value, can be, in principle, attributed to the discrete nature of the charge generated by the detector. At the same time, the effect of shot-noise suppression, which is observed with certain light sources (squeezed light) is clearly related to the statistics of light, and quantum mechanics is completely necessary for its description. Another example, which brings us closer to the subject of the present paper, is two-photon light. This type of light contains only pairs of photons (often called biphotons), and hence, a pair of properly aligned photon-counting detectors registering two-photon light, in an ideal case, will produce only simultaneous photocounts. This behavior, again, can only be explained in terms of a quantum-mechanical description for the light.
The wave aspect of light is observed experimentally through interference phenomena, and in a certain sense such observations always require a division of the given (initial) light field into two or more space-time parts. The division can only be done by introducing matter (massive particles) in the field region, and the light-matter interaction inevitably changes the initial state of the field. Not least when one is dealing with single and few-photon interference, it is good to remember again a central point of Niels Bohr, namely that no elementary phenomenon is a phenomenon until it is a registered (observed) phenomenon. It turns out that it is possible to observe interference with a quantized electromagnetic field which contains only one photon. Since the irreversible final detection destroys the photon, it is in practice necessary to repeat the experiment starting from the same initial (given) conditions. Below we shall discuss the basics of single-photon interference in the simplest terms.