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

Quantum Phenomena

Jeffrey Alan Barrett

Published Dec 26, 2019• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Abstract The behavior of electrons provides several concrete examples of quantum phenomena. We consider electron spin properties, how electrons move, quantum randomness and the relationships between observables, quantum limits on empirical prediction, superpositions, interference effects, nonlocality, and the role of observation in generating quantum phenomena. Each illustrates the counterintuitive nature of quantum phenomena and provides a sense of the sort of phenomena that any satisfactory formulation of quantum mechanics must predict and explain.

DOI
10.1093/oso/9780198844686.003.0002

Related papers

The Conceptual Foundations of Quantum Mechanics

Jeffrey Alan Barrett

Abstract The book starts with a description of classical mechanics then discusses the quantum phenomena that require us to give up our commonsense classical intuitions. We consider the physical and conceptual arguments that led to the standard von Neumann-Dirac formulation of quantum mechanics and how the standard theory explains quantum phenomena. This includes a discussion of how the theory’s two dynamical laws work with the standard interpretation of states to explain determinate measurement records, quantum statistics, interference effects, entanglement, decoherence, and quantum nonlocality. A careful understanding of how the standard theory works ultimately leads to the quantum measurement problem. We consider how the measurement problem threatens the logical consistency of the standard theory then turn to a discussion of the main proposals for resolving it. This includes collapse formulations of quantum mechanics like Wigner’s extension of the standard theory and the GRW approach and no-collapse formulations like pure wave mechanics, the various many-worlds theories, and Bohmian mechanics. In discussing alternative formulations of quantum mechanics we pay particular attention to the explanatory role played by each theory’s empirical ontology and associated metaphysical commitments and the conceptual trade-offs between theoretical options.

•Dec 26, 2019•57 citations

Imaging the quantum world using the phase of electron waves

Akira Tonomura

Electrons are always detected as particles, but can also show wave properties. This apparently incompatible nature of electrons that quantum mechanics predicts can now be experimentally demonstrated. In addition, the wave properties of electrons can be utilized to directly observe quantum phenomena which have begun to appear at many places in nanoscopic regions. Examples include the observation of quantized vortices in superconductors by using bright electron beams we developed.

IEEE Conference on Nanotechnology (IEEE NANO)•Sep 9, 2005•0 citations

Quantum mechanics

Marcus Pivato

[M]odern physics has definitely decided in favor of Plato. In fact the smallest units of matter are not physical objects in the ordinary sense; they are forms, ideas which can be expressed unambiguously only in mathematical language. Werner Heisenberg Basic framework Prerequisites: Appendix C, §1B(ii). Near the beginning of the twentieth century, physicists realized that electromagnetic waves sometimes exhibited particle-like properties, as if light were composed of discrete ‘photons’. In 1923, Louis de Broglie proposed that, conversely, particles of matter might have wave-like properties. This was confirmed in 1927 by C. J. Davisson and L. H. Germer and, independently, by G. P. Thompson, who showed that an electron beam exhibited an unmistakable diffraction pattern when scattered off a metal plate, as if the beam were composed of ‘electron waves’. Systems with many interacting particles exhibit even more curious phenomena. Quantum mechanics is a theory which explains these phenomena. We will not attempt here to provide a physical justification for quantum mechanics. Historically, quantum theory developed through a combination of vaguely implausible physical analogies and wild guesses motivated by inexplicable empirical phenomena. By now, these analogies and guesses have been overwhelmingly vindicated by experimental evidence. The best justification for quantum mechanics is that it ‘works’, by which we mean that its theoretical predictions match all available empirical data with astonishing accuracy.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Jan 7, 2010•0 citations

Quantum Interference

Jeffrey Alan Barrett

Abstract Moving to more subtle experiments, we consider how the standard formulation of quantum mechanics predicts and explains interference phenomena. Tracking the conditions under which one observes interference phenomena leads to the notion of quantum decoherence. We see why one must sharply distinguish between collapse phenomena and decoherence phenomena on the standard formulation of quantum mechanics. While collapses explain determinate measurement records, environmental decoherence just produces more complex, entangled states where the physical systems involved lack ordinary physical properties. We characterize the quantum-mechanical wave function as both an element of a Hilbert space and a complex-valued function over a configuration space. We also discuss how the wave function is interpreted in the standard theory.

•Dec 26, 2019•0 citations

Introduction

Kenichi Konishi, Giampiero Paffuti

Abstract Physical phenomena in the microscopic world are extraordinary and often appear even paradoxical from the viewpoint of our daily experiences. A closer look, however, shows that they possess a simple and elegant logic of their own. By way of introduction to this entire volume on quantum mechanics, let us discuss a few such features, taking the example of the electron. We then briefly review the historical development which led to the discovery of quantum mechanics.

•Mar 5, 2009•0 citations

A Brief Introduction

Jeffrey Alan Barrett

Abstract This chapter discuses two stock examples of quantum interference effects — the two-slit experiment and the Wigner's Stern–Gerlach experiment. It notes that each experiment shows the sort of quantum weirdness that any satisfactory formulation of quantum mechanics must ultimately predict and explain. It also enumerates points that will be discussed regarding Hugh Everett III's relative state theory and his solution to the quantum measurement problem.

•Aug 16, 2001•1 citation
Abstract The behavior of electrons provides several concrete examples of quantum phenomena. We consider electron spin properties, how electrons move, quantum randomness and the relationships between observables, quantum limits on empirical prediction, superpositions, interference effects, nonlocality, and the role of observation in generating quantum phenomena. Each illustrates the counterintuitive nature of quantum phenomena and provides a sense of the sort of phenomena that any satisfactory formulation of quantum mechanics must predict and explain.
Abstract The book starts with a description of classical mechanics then discusses the quantum phenomena that require us to give up our commonsense classical intuitions. We consider the physical and conceptual arguments that led to the standard von Neumann-Dirac formulation of quantum mechanics and how the standard theory explains quantum phenomena. This includes a discussion of how the theory’s two dynamical laws work with the standard interpretation of states to explain determinate measurement records, quantum statistics, interference effects, entanglement, decoherence, and quantum nonlocality. A careful understanding of how the standard theory works ultimately leads to the quantum measurement problem. We consider how the measurement problem threatens the logical consistency of the standard theory then turn to a discussion of the main proposals for resolving it. This includes collapse formulations of quantum mechanics like Wigner’s extension of the standard theory and the GRW approach and no-collapse formulations like pure wave mechanics, the various many-worlds theories, and Bohmian mechanics. In discussing alternative formulations of quantum mechanics we pay particular attention to the explanatory role played by each theory’s empirical ontology and associated metaphysical commitments and the conceptual trade-offs between theoretical options.
[M]odern physics has definitely decided in favor of Plato. In fact the smallest units of matter are not physical objects in the ordinary sense; they are forms, ideas which can be expressed unambiguously only in mathematical language. Werner Heisenberg Basic framework Prerequisites: Appendix C, §1B(ii). Near the beginning of the twentieth century, physicists realized that electromagnetic waves sometimes exhibited particle-like properties, as if light were composed of discrete ‘photons’. In 1923, Louis de Broglie proposed that, conversely, particles of matter might have wave-like properties. This was confirmed in 1927 by C. J. Davisson and L. H. Germer and, independently, by G. P. Thompson, who showed that an electron beam exhibited an unmistakable diffraction pattern when scattered off a metal plate, as if the beam were composed of ‘electron waves’. Systems with many interacting particles exhibit even more curious phenomena. Quantum mechanics is a theory which explains these phenomena. We will not attempt here to provide a physical justification for quantum mechanics. Historically, quantum theory developed through a combination of vaguely implausible physical analogies and wild guesses motivated by inexplicable empirical phenomena. By now, these analogies and guesses have been overwhelmingly vindicated by experimental evidence. The best justification for quantum mechanics is that it ‘works’, by which we mean that its theoretical predictions match all available empirical data with astonishing accuracy.
Abstract Moving to more subtle experiments, we consider how the standard formulation of quantum mechanics predicts and explains interference phenomena. Tracking the conditions under which one observes interference phenomena leads to the notion of quantum decoherence. We see why one must sharply distinguish between collapse phenomena and decoherence phenomena on the standard formulation of quantum mechanics. While collapses explain determinate measurement records, environmental decoherence just produces more complex, entangled states where the physical systems involved lack ordinary physical properties. We characterize the quantum-mechanical wave function as both an element of a Hilbert space and a complex-valued function over a configuration space. We also discuss how the wave function is interpreted in the standard theory.