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

Two-Photon Ghost Image and Interference-Diffraction

Yanhua H. Shih, Alexander V. Sergienko, T. B. Pittman, Dmitry Strekalov, Давид Николаевич Клышко

Published Jan 1, 1996• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

One of the most surprising consequences of quantum mechanics is entanglement of two or more distance particles. The two-particle entangled state was mathematically formulated by Schrodinger. Based on this unusual quantum behavior, EPR defined their 'physical reality' and then asked the question: 'Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?' One may not appreciate EPR's criterion of physical reality and insist that 'no elementary quantum phenomenon is a phenomenon until it is a recorded phenomenon'. Optical spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC) is the most effective mechanism to generate an EPR type entangled two-photon state. In SPDC, an optical beam, called the pump, is incident on a birefringent crystal. The pump is intense enough so that nonlinear effects lead to the conversion of pump photons into pairs of photons, historically called signal and idler. Technically, the SPDC is said to be type-1 or type-2, depending on whether the signal and idler beams have parallel or orthogonal polarization. The SPDC conversion efficiency is typically on the order of 10(exp -9) to 10(exp -11), depending on the SPDC nonlinear material. The signal and idler intensities are extremely low, only single photon detection devices can register them. The quantum entanglement nature of SPDC has been demonstrated in EPR-Bohm experiments and Bell's inequality measurements. The following two experiments were recently performed in our laboratory, which are more closely related to the original 1935 EPR gedankenezperiment. The first experiment is a two-photon optical imaging type experiment, which has been named 'ghost image' by the physics community. The signal and idler beams of SPDC are sent in different directions, so that the detection of the signal and idler photons can be performed by two distant photon counting detectors. An aperture object (mask) is placed in front of the signal photon detector and illuminated by the signal beam through a convex lens. Surprisingly, an image of this aperture is observed in the idler beam, by scanning the idler photon detector in the transverse plane of the idler beam, if we are sure that the idler photon detector 'catches' the 'twin brother' of the signal, which can be easily performed by a coincidence measurement. This effect is even more striking when we found that the object-lens-image relationship satisfies the Gaussian thin lens equation. The second experiment demonstrates two-photon 'ghost' interference-diffraction. The experimental set up is similar to the image experiment, except that rather than a lens and an aperture it is a Young's double-slit (or a single-slit) inserted into the path of the signal beam. We could not find any interference (or diffraction) pattern behind the slit. Surprisingly, an interference (or diffraction) pattern is observed when scanning the detector in the idler beam, if we are sure that the idler photon detector 'catches' the 'twin brother' of the signal.

DOI
10.13016/m2qi7h-gqvz

Related papers

Two-photon ghost image and quantum cropto-fax

Yanhua H. Shih, T. B. Pittman, Dmitry Strekalov +1 more

The reported experiment is a two-photon optical imaging experiment1 in which a spontaneous-parametric-downconversion light beam, which consists of pairs of orthogonally polarized signal and idler photons, is split into two diverging beams by a polarization beam splitter, so that co- incidence detections may be performed between two distant photon-counting detectors. An aperture (mask) placed in front of one of the detectors is illuminated by the signal beam through a convex lens. Surprisingly, an image of this aperture is observed in the coincidence counting rate when the other detector is scanned in the transverse plane of the idler beam, even though both detectors’ single counting rates remain constant.

Quantum Electronics and Laser Science Conference•May 22, 1995•0 citations

Observation of Two-Photon “Ghost” Interference and Diffraction

Dmitry Strekalov, Alexander V. Sergienko, Давид Николаевич Клышко +1 more

Observations of unusual diffraction and interference by two-photon correlation measurements are reported. The signal and idler beams produced by spontaneous parametric down-conversion are sent in different directions, and detected by two distant pointlike photon counting detectors. A double slit or a single slit is inserted into the signal beam. Interference-diffraction patterns are observed in coincidences by scanning the detector in the idler beam.

Physical Review Letters•May 1, 1995•890 citations

Observation of two-photon virtual interference and diffraction

Dmitry Strekalov, Alexander V. Sergienko, Давид Николаевич Клышко +1 more

Observations of unusual diffraction and interference by two-photon correlation measurements are reported. The signal and idler beams produced by spontaneous parametric down conversion are sent in different directions, and detected by two distant point-like photon counting detectors. A double-slit or a single-slit is inserted into the signal beam. Interference- diffraction patterns are observed in coincidences by scanning the detector in the idler beam.

Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE•May 6, 1996•0 citations

Optical imaging by means of two-photon quantum entanglement

T. B. Pittman, Yanhua H. Shih, Dmitry Strekalov +1 more

A two-photon optical imaging experiment was performed based on the quantum nature of the signal and idler photon pairs produced in spontaneous parametric down-conversion. An aperture placed in front of a fixed detector is illuminated by the signal beam through a convex lens. A sharp magnified image of the aperture is found in the coincidence counting rate when a mobile detector is scanned in the transverse plane of the idler beam at a specific distance in relation to the lens.

Physical Review A•Nov 1, 1995•2,142 citations

The Role of Detector Position in Quantum Ghost Diffraction

Andres Vega, Elkin A. Santos, Sina Saravi +2 more

Quantum ghost diffraction enables the measurement of the spatial diffraction pattern of an object without measuring the spatial distribution of the photons that actually interacted with the object [1]. It uses photon pairs generated e.g. by spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC) in a nonlinear optical crystal, and relies on the correlation of the generated signal and idler photons in their spatial and temporal degrees of freedom. This measurement scheme is sketched in Fig. 1 (a). After the source, the two photons are separated into two different paths. The object, here we consider a grating, is located only in the signal path and thus interacts only with the signal photons. To measure the diffraction pattern, two detectors of small cross sections are used in the signal and idler arms. The signal detector is usually at a fixed position, collecting photons that interacted with the object. The idler detector can have varying positions, allowing to spatially resolve the collected photons that never interacted with the object. Through measuring the two-photon coincidence counting rate p, there exists the potential for recovering the diffraction pattern of the object, which allows to retrieve the grating period.

Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics Europe & European Quantum Electronics Conference (CLEO/Europe-EQEC)•Jun 1, 2019•0 citations

Quantum interference by two temporally distinguishable pulses

Y.-H. Kim, Maria V. Chekhova, S. P. Kulik +1 more

We have experimentally demonstrated two-photon interference between biphoton amplitudes arising from two well-separated pump pulses. It is important to note the following. 1) The pump pulse intensity was low enough so that single counting rates of the detectors were kept much smaller than pulse repetition rates: the probability of having one spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC) photon pair per pulse in our experiment is negligible. Hence the interference cannot be explained as two SPDC photons from two pump pulses (one SPDC photon pair from each pulse) interfering at the detectors. The two pump pulses simply provide two biphoton amplitudes which could result in coincidence counts, and interference occurs between these two biphoton amplitudes only when they are indistinguishable. 2) The BBO crystal in our experiment was only 100 /spl mu/m thick, so the two-pulse did not exist in BBO at the same time at any moment. 3) Due to the delays in the interferometer (/spl tau/ /spl tau//sub 1/), the signal-idler never met at the beamsplitter. Therefore, the existence of two-photon interference cannot be viewed as the interference between the signal and idler photons. These three points again emphasize the fact that it is the indistinguishability of the two-photon Feynman alternatives for the biphoton amplitudes which is responsible for the two-photon quantum interference effects.

Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics Pacific Rim (CLEO-PR)•Jan 20, 2003•0 citations
One of the most surprising consequences of quantum mechanics is entanglement of two or more distance particles. The two-particle entangled state was mathematically formulated by Schrodinger. Based on this unusual quantum behavior, EPR defined their 'physical reality' and then asked the question: 'Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?' One may not appreciate EPR's criterion of physical reality and insist that 'no elementary quantum phenomenon is a phenomenon until it is a recorded phenomenon'. Optical spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC) is the most effective mechanism to generate an EPR type entangled two-photon state. In SPDC, an optical beam, called the pump, is incident on a birefringent crystal. The pump is intense enough so that nonlinear effects lead to the conversion of pump photons into pairs of photons, historically called signal and idler. Technically, the SPDC is said to be type-1 or type-2, depending on whether the signal and idler beams have parallel or orthogonal polarization. The SPDC conversion efficiency is typically on the order of 10(exp -9) to 10(exp -11), depending on the SPDC nonlinear material. The signal and idler intensities are extremely low, only single photon detection devices can register them. The quantum entanglement nature of SPDC has been demonstrated in EPR-Bohm experiments and Bell's inequality measurements. The following two experiments were recently performed in our laboratory, which are more closely related to the original 1935 EPR gedankenezperiment. The first experiment is a two-photon optical imaging type experiment, which has been named 'ghost image' by the physics community. The signal and idler beams of SPDC are sent in different directions, so that the detection of the signal and idler photons can be performed by two distant photon counting detectors. An aperture object (mask) is placed in front of the signal photon detector and illuminated by the signal beam through a convex lens. Surprisingly, an image of this aperture is observed in the idler beam, by scanning the idler photon detector in the transverse plane of the idler beam, if we are sure that the idler photon detector 'catches' the 'twin brother' of the signal, which can be easily performed by a coincidence measurement. This effect is even more striking when we found that the object-lens-image relationship satisfies the Gaussian thin lens equation. The second experiment demonstrates two-photon 'ghost' interference-diffraction. The experimental set up is similar to the image experiment, except that rather than a lens and an aperture it is a Young's double-slit (or a single-slit) inserted into the path of the signal beam. We could not find any interference (or diffraction) pattern behind the slit. Surprisingly, an interference (or diffraction) pattern is observed when scanning the detector in the idler beam, if we are sure that the idler photon detector 'catches' the 'twin brother' of the signal.
The reported experiment is a two-photon optical imaging experiment1 in which a spontaneous-parametric-downconversion light beam, which consists of pairs of orthogonally polarized signal and idler photons, is split into two diverging beams by a polarization beam splitter, so that co- incidence detections may be performed between two distant photon-counting detectors. An aperture (mask) placed in front of one of the detectors is illuminated by the signal beam through a convex lens. Surprisingly, an image of this aperture is observed in the coincidence counting rate when the other detector is scanned in the transverse plane of the idler beam, even though both detectors’ single counting rates remain constant.
Quantum ghost diffraction enables the measurement of the spatial diffraction pattern of an object without measuring the spatial distribution of the photons that actually interacted with the object [1]. It uses photon pairs generated e.g. by spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC) in a nonlinear optical crystal, and relies on the correlation of the generated signal and idler photons in their spatial and temporal degrees of freedom. This measurement scheme is sketched in Fig. 1 (a). After the source, the two photons are separated into two different paths. The object, here we consider a grating, is located only in the signal path and thus interacts only with the signal photons. To measure the diffraction pattern, two detectors of small cross sections are used in the signal and idler arms. The signal detector is usually at a fixed position, collecting photons that interacted with the object. The idler detector can have varying positions, allowing to spatially resolve the collected photons that never interacted with the object. Through measuring the two-photon coincidence counting rate p, there exists the potential for recovering the diffraction pattern of the object, which allows to retrieve the grating period.
We have experimentally demonstrated two-photon interference between biphoton amplitudes arising from two well-separated pump pulses. It is important to note the following. 1) The pump pulse intensity was low enough so that single counting rates of the detectors were kept much smaller than pulse repetition rates: the probability of having one spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC) photon pair per pulse in our experiment is negligible. Hence the interference cannot be explained as two SPDC photons from two pump pulses (one SPDC photon pair from each pulse) interfering at the detectors. The two pump pulses simply provide two biphoton amplitudes which could result in coincidence counts, and interference occurs between these two biphoton amplitudes only when they are indistinguishable. 2) The BBO crystal in our experiment was only 100 /spl mu/m thick, so the two-pulse did not exist in BBO at the same time at any moment. 3) Due to the delays in the interferometer (/spl tau/ /spl tau//sub 1/), the signal-idler never met at the beamsplitter. Therefore, the existence of two-photon interference cannot be viewed as the interference between the signal and idler photons. These three points again emphasize the fact that it is the indistinguishability of the two-photon Feynman alternatives for the biphoton amplitudes which is responsible for the two-photon quantum interference effects.