Abstract Now that we have explored qubits and the phenomenon of superposition, we can ask the question: how do we know that superposition actually happens? is the evidence that shows that a quantum particle really does exist in two different locations at this same time while in a quantum superposition? The nature of science means that experiments are constantly updating previous results, so are there other interpretations of the experimental results that can explain the data without the need for superposition? In this chapter we’ll explore the experimental evidence interpretations other than quantum superposition. Further, while a flipping coin is a simple model of a qubit, it is not very useful for building a quantum computer because it does not exhibit all of the properties of a true quantum superposition. For example, we cannot manipulate the superposition amplitudes. In this chapter, we will study some real physical examples of quantum particles in a superposition containing two states. These examples include a photon in a beam splitter and the Mach–Zehnder interferometer.
Abstract Now that we have explored qubits and the phenomenon of superposition, we can ask the question: how do we know that superposition actually happens? is the evidence that shows that a quantum particle really does exist in two different locations at this same time while in a quantum superposition? The nature of science means that experiments are constantly updating previous results, so are there other interpretations of the experimental results that can explain the data without the need for superposition? In this chapter we’ll explore the experimental evidence interpretations other than quantum superposition. Further, while a flipping coin is a simple model of a qubit, it is not very useful for building a quantum computer because it does not exhibit all of the properties of a true quantum superposition. For example, we cannot manipulate the superposition amplitudes. In this chapter, we will study some real physical examples of quantum particles in a superposition containing two states. These examples include a photon in a beam splitter and the Mach–Zehnder interferometer.
Abstract The Mach–Zehnder interferometer experiment described earlier shows why and how quantum mechanics is different from classical mechanics. A photon sent through a beam splitter behaves like a particle when it is observed by only one of the two detectors. When two beam splitters are used, the photon “interferes with itself” and behaves like a wave. This is the so-called wave-particle duality of quantum mechanics which leads to quantum entanglement. This chapter discusses quantum superpositions when two or more particles are present. Understanding and analysing entanglement is one of the most interesting directions in the field of quantum information. First, a historical background of quantum entanglement is given, followed by a discussion on Bell's inequalities, separable states that do not violate Bell's inequalities, pure states that violate Bell's inequalities, mixed states that do not violate Bell's inequalities, and entanglement in second quantisation.
It is generally believed that the “mystery” behind understanding Quantum Mechanics (QM) and the global drives to construct quantum computers using “Entanglement”, can be understood from how the two-beam superposition effect (SE) emerges out of a 2-slit, and a Mach-Zehnder Interferometer (MZI). This chapter rehabilitates the classical analyses of these two superposition effects, while exploiting functional asymmetries, either deliberately introduced or intrinsic in the two-beam apparatuses. We are using mathematical formalism already well-established in classical optics since 1800’s, but with the extra emphasis that any final data generation requires some real physical interaction between the detector and the two light signals simultaneously stimulating the detecting molecules. This critical step of physical interaction process is not explicitly underscored by either the classical or the quantum physics. However, the asymmetry, either in the propagation or in the interaction process, is utilized to bring out the contradictions with the QM interpretations. For the 2-slit system, we deliberately introduce asymmetry on one of the slits. For MZI, the asymmetry is already built into the classical reflection property of a typical beams splitter.
A quantum system can behave as a wave or as a particle, depending on the experimental arrangement. When, for example, measuring a photon using a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, the photon acts as a wave if the second beam splitter is inserted, but as a particle if this beam splitter is omitted. The decision of whether or not to insert this beam splitter can be made after the photon has entered the interferometer, as in Wheeler's famous delayed-choice thought experiment. In recent quantum versions of this experiment, this decision is controlled by a quantum ancilla, while the beam splitter is itself still a classical object. Here, we propose and realize a variant of the quantum delayed-choice experiment. We configure a superconducting quantum circuit as a Ramsey interferometer, where the element that acts as the first beam splitter can be put in a quantum superposition of its active and inactive states, as verified by the negative values of its Wigner function. We show that this enables the wave and particle aspects of the system to be observed with a single setup, without involving an ancilla that is not itself a part of the interferometer. We also study the transition of this quantum beam splitter from a quantum to a classical object due to decoherence, as observed by monitoring the interferometer output.
The production of maxima and minima by the superposition of two or more light signals provides fundamental support for the wave nature of light. This result is based on the study of wave interference phenomena which remains the only approach to explain the production of those maxima and minima. In a system that is prepared to work with only one photon at a time, any detector can signal only one or zero. In 1986, a rigorously controlled experiment was designed by Grangier, G. Roger, and A. Aspect, [Europhys Lett. 1(4), p. 173, 1986] that guaranteed a single-photon beam. The explanation of the experimental results implied the interference of the wave function of a single-photon with itself. Thus, the explanation of interference that is accepted for an ensemble of photons was assumed to be valid for a single photon. In this study, we prepare a Mach-Zehnder interferometer using the same type of beam splitters used by Grangier et al. to test the assumption mentioned above. Our results allow us to explain the results of Grangier et al. because of the interaction between light and the beam splitters. Our results also verify that their wave interpretation of the results is not valid. Here, we present the essential findings of the extensive experimental evidence that supports our ideas.
Optical lossless beam splitters are frequently encountered in fundamental physics experiments regarding the nature of light, including “which-way” determination or the EPR paradox and their measurement apparatus. Although they look as common optical components at first glance, their behaviour remains somewhat mysterious since they apparently exhibit stand-alone particle-like features, and then wave-like characteristics when inserted into a Mach-Zehnder interferometer. In this communication are examined and discussed some basic properties of these beamssplitters, both from a classical optics and quantum physics point of view. Herein the most evident convergences and contradictions are highlighted, and the results of a few emblematic experiments demonstrating photon existence are discussed. Alternative empirical models are also proposed in order to shed light on some remaining issues.
For around five decades, physicists have been experimenting with single quanta such as single photons. Insofar as the practised ensemble reasoning has become obsolete for the interpretation of these experiments, the non-classical intrinsic probabilistic nature of quantum theory has gained increased importance. One of the most important exclusive features of quantum physics is the undeniable existence of the superposition of states, even for single quantum objects. One known example of this effect is entanglement. In this paper, two classically contradictory phenomena are combined to one single experiment. This experiment incontestably shows that a single photon incident on an optical beam splitter can either be reflected or transmitted. The almost complete absence of coincident clicks of two photodetectors demonstrates that these two output states are incompatible. However, when combining these states using two mirrors, we can observe interference patterns in the counting rate of the single photon detector. The only explanation for this is that the two incompatible output states are prepared and kept simultaneously—a typical consequence of a quantum superposition of states. (Semi-)classical physical concepts fail here, and a full quantum concept is predestined to explain the complementary experimental outcomes for the quantum optical “non-waves” called single photons. In this paper, we intend to demonstrate that a true quantum physical key experiment (“true” in the sense that it cannot be explained by any classical physical concept), when combined with full quantum reasoning (probability, superposition and interference), influences students’ readiness to use quantum elements for interpretation.