An optical effect first proposed in the 17th century by Isaac Newton has now been observed to affect matter as well, thus providing yet further affirmation of wave-particle duality. Newton predicted that a beam of light reflected at a glass–vacuum surface should undergo a minuscule lateral shift. He thought that wavefronts, having reached the vacuum, should “slide” a short distance along the interface before re-emerging and reflecting back into the glass. Given the tiny scale of this effect, however, it was not until 1947 that it was first observed experimentally by the physicists F Goos and H Hänchen.
An optical effect first proposed in the 17th century by Isaac Newton has now been observed to affect matter as well, thus providing yet further affirmation of wave-particle duality. Newton predicted that a beam of light reflected at a glass–vacuum surface should undergo a minuscule lateral shift. He thought that wavefronts, having reached the vacuum, should “slide” a short distance along the interface before re-emerging and reflecting back into the glass. Given the tiny scale of this effect, however, it was not until 1947 that it was first observed experimentally by the physicists F Goos and H Hänchen.
The evolution of light theories began with Isaac Newton's corpuscular model, which explained reflection and refraction but could not account for diffraction and interference. In contrast, Christiaan Huygens proposed a wave theory, explaining light's behavior through an ether-based medium, supported by his principle that each point in a wavefront acts as a secondary source. This idea was experimentally supported in the early nineteenth century when Thomas Young's double-slit experiment revealed an interference pattern, affirming light's wave nature. Later, James Clerk Maxwell unified electricity and magnetism, establishing light as an electromagnetic wave and extending the electromagnetic spectrum beyond visible light. In the twentieth century, Einstein's photoelectric effect introduced the concept of wave-particle duality, demonstrating that light behaves as discrete photons. Soon after, Louis de Broglie extended the idea of wave-particle duality to matter, a prediction confirmed in 1927 when Clinton Davisson and Lester Germer observed electron diffraction from a crystal and, independently, G.P. Thomson demonstrated electron diffraction through thin films, both proving that electrons also exhibit wave-like properties. This concept was dramatically visualized by Claus Jonsson's 1961 electron double-slit experiment. Recently, the ALICE collaboration observed quantum interference patterns at the femtometer scale in ultra-relativistic nuclear collisions, pushing quantum interference studies to new frontiers.
In conventional optics for light waves, the pioneering work by Goos-Hänchen in 1947 on the lateral shift (or displacement) of a light beam along the surface of a dielectric boundary under the condition of total reflection has stimulated a large number of studies. The key physics behind the Goos-Hänchen shift is the nature of wave interference. From the perspective of wave optics, the incident beam of a finite transverse width can be viewed as composed of plane wave components, each of which has a slightly different transverse wavevector. Each wave component, after the total internal reflection, undergoes a different phase shift, and the superposition of all the reflected wave components gives rise to the lateral shift of the intensity peak in the reflected beam.
Light - the physicists' problem. The nature of light was the subject \nof such controversy ever since two schools of thought - one led by Newton, \nthe other by Huyghens - had proposed two different viewpoints of the nature \nof light. Newton viewed light as a stream of discrete particles while Huyghens \nmaintained that light was a form of wave-motion. As any O-level student \nknows, experimentation involving wave-properties such as diffraction (the \nfamous Young's slits experiments) eventually proved as correct Huyghens' \nidea of light as waves passing through a continium, which was eventually shown \nto be space itself by the Scot, James Clerk-MaxwelI in his work on electromagnetic \nradiation. By the end of the 19th Century, it seemed that light presented no problem. Light was waves.
Wave-particle duality of light has dumbfounded physical scientists for centuries. Sir Isaac Newton contended that light was made up of individual particles while Hooke (who was utterly despised by Newton) wrote on the wave-like properties of light.[6] In 1801, Thomas Young’s double slit experiment demonstrated wavelike properties of light. In 1905, Einstein revisited the theory of light acting as a particle to resolve conflicts between the wave theory of light and certain experimental results such as the photoelectric effect.[11] Experiments confirming particle-like properties of light were not realized until later in the 20th century. In 1981, Grangier, Roger and Aspect published a paper titled Experimental Evidence for a Photon Anticorrelation Effect on a Beam Splitter: A New Light on Single-Photon Interferences. This paper reported on one of the first successful anticoincidence experiments which measured the particle-like behavior of light. The paper also reported on an experiment that used the same source and detection scheme as the anticoincidence experiment, which measured interference. Grangier, Roger and Aspect eloquently depicted the conundrum of the waveparticle duality of light. To what extent does this this complementary nature of light exist? How does light know when to display wave-like or particle-like properties? One popular answer to this was that light can ‘sense’ what the experiment is attempting to measure. Based on the initial ‘feel,’ light would decide whether or not it will display wave-like or particle-like behavior before entering the experiment. This hypothesis is aptly named the conspiracy theory.[2]
The long history of the dispute among physicists as to whether matter is composed of particles or waves is reviewed. A turning point came at the dawn of the 20th century in the form of the de Broglie momentum-wavelength and Bohr/Planck energy frequency relations. It was on this basis that Schrödinger developed a quantum mechanical differential equation whose solution came to be known as a wave function. The Born Interpretation of these functions holds that their absolute square constitutes a probability distribution which has been used successfully to make predictions of the properties of the system under discussion. It is pointed out that the phenomenon of light refraction played a key role in the development of both Newton’s corpuscular theory of light and the competing theory of Huygens which looks upon light as consisting exclusively of waves. It is shown that Newton’s failure to predict the decrease in the speed of light as it passes from air into water was not because of his belief in the particle composition of light, but rather because he not did anticipate that the mass of a photon changes upon entering a medium of higher index of refraction n. By assuming that the energy E of light is equal pc/n, where p is the momentum of the photons and c is the speed of light in free space, it is shown that the experimental dependence of the speed the light on its wavelength as it passes through a transparent medium is derived successfully through the use of Hamilton’s Canonical Equations and Newton’s Second Law of Kinetics. It is suggested that the relationship between particles and waves can be understood by noting that the localized properties of matter exhibit themselves in experiments such as the photoelectric effect where attention can be concentrated on the behavior of a single particle. The corresponding wave properties occur when large numbers of particles are observed under exactly similar circumstances, as for example in electron diffraction. ...........
Newton thought that light was made up of particles, but then it was discovered, as we have seen here, that it behaves like a wave. Later, however (in the beginning of the twentieth century) it was found that light did indeed sometimes behave like a particle. Historically, the electron, for example, was thought to behave like a particle, and then it was found that in many respects it behaved like a wave. So it really behaves like neither. Now we have given up. We say: “it is like neither.” ere is one lucky break, however-electrons behave like light. e quantum behaviour of atomic objects (electrons, protons, neutron, photons, and so on) is the same for all, they are all ‘particle waves’ or whatever you want to call them.