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

Physics

Key Experiment and Quantum Reasoning

Moritz Waitzmann, Kim-Alessandro Weber, Susanne Weßnigk, Ruediger Scholz

Published Oct 8, 2022• 9 citations
Publisher

Abstract

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.

DOI
10.3390/physics4040078

Related papers

Testing quantum reasoning: Developing, validating, and application of a questionnaire

Moritz Waitzmann, Ruediger Scholz, Susanne Weßnigk

Clear and rigorous quantum reasoning is needed to explain quantum physical phenomena. As pillars of true quantum physical explanations, we suggest specific quantum reasoning derived from quantum physical key ideas. An experiment is suggested to support such a quantum reasoning, in which a quantized radiation field interacts with an optical beam splitter, leading to experimental results conflicting with classical physical predictions. The results, however, can be explained consistently with a quantum reasoning based on the key ideas of probability, superposition, and interference (PSI). In this quantum optical key experiment the optical beam splitter prepares a superposition of single photon states and a Michelson interferometer is used to detect the superposition via controlled propagation phases. Although different single photon experimental setups (aimed at helping students to gain access to foundational issues in quantum physics) have been discussed in the past, the wave-particle dualism bound to classical physics maintains its predominance as an explanation pattern for the interpretation of these experiments. The study presented here investigates the effect of the quantum optical key experiment on the ability of students to use quantum reasoning based on the key ideas of PSI to overcome the naive wave-particle dualism. The current state of relevant studies that test student access to quantum physics can roughly be divided into two distinct areas: one tests how mathematical abilities help them to understand quantum physics and one tests how nonmathematical representations of a set of specific quantum theoretical traits (“Wesenszüge”) lead to a deeper understanding of quantum physics. There is a lack of questionnaires that focus on the idea of developing quantum reasoning based on superposition, probability, and interference of quantum states combined with a real experiment using true quantum light. In the first part of the article, we describe the physical modeling and present the development of the questionnaire. The set of items has been constructed from newly developed items and combined with well-tested ones. The validation of the set addresses qualitative and quantitative methods. In the second part, we give a pre- and poststudy examination of the impact of the quantum optical key experiment on students’ quantum reasoning. A significant increase in the number of students using quantum arguments is based on PSI reasoning for the explanation of an interference, such as the behavior of single photon states. Though the increase is significant, we found only minor changes in a particular issue to the students’ reasoning when approaching quantum physics as illustrated by a sample of answers given in the second part of the article. The concept of quantum states and the principle of superposition still appear particularly difficult. Published by the American Physical Society 2024

Physical Review Physics Education Research•Apr 5, 2024•11 citations

Reality in Superposition: Quantum Mechanics

Lev Reyzin

This chapter introduces quantum mechanics through the experimental discoveries that revealed the limits of classical physics. Beginning with the historical debate over whether light is a wave or a particle, it examines Young’s double-slit experiment and its modern single-particle versions, which demonstrate that quantum objects can exist in superpositions of mutually exclusive states. The chapter explains how interference arises when alternative possibilities are not measured and how interaction with the environment suppresses these effects through decoherence, giving rise to classical behavior at macroscopic scales. A sequence of thought experiments involving interferometers and Stern–Gerlach devices highlights the counterintuitive structure of quantum measurement and the incompatibility of certain physical properties, as captured by the uncertainty principle. The chapter emphasizes that quantum mechanics does not describe particles taking multiple paths simultaneously in a classical sense but rather requires a new framework for probability based on amplitudes and interference. Finally, the discussion connects these foundational ideas to emerging technologies such as quantum computing, showing how superposition and entanglement can be harnessed to perform computations that have no classical analogue.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Oct 21, 2026•0 citations

Complement 5B: One-photon wave packet

G. Grynberg, Alain Aspect, Claude Fabre +1 more

One-photon sources are important elements in quantum optics. The archetypal example is an atom raised to an excited state at time t = 0, then de-exciting with emission of a single photon. The development of this kind of source depends on progress with experimental techniques, e.g. the possibility of isolating a single atom, molecule or quantum well. In this complement, we present the formalism for describing the corresponding radiation, and use it to discuss some spectacular experiments which bring out properties quite incompatible with a classical description of the electromagnetic field. We begin in Section 5B.2 by describing the anti-correlation between detections on either side of a semi-reflecting mirror, establishing the quantitative difference with a classical field. Section 5B.3 discusses a quantum optical effect that was only demonstrated at the beginning of the twenty-first century, namely the quantum coalescence of two one-photon wave packets on a semi-reflecting mirror, which occurs even when the two photons were emitted by independent atoms. An analogous effect, the Hong–Hou–Mandel effect, is discussed in Chapter 7. These effects exemplify quantum interference involving two photons. Finally, Section 5B.4 is concerned with quantum calculations involving quasi-classical states. As we now know, this leads to results that are identical to the predictions of semi-classical theory.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Sep 2, 2010•0 citations

Observing the quantum behavior of light in an undergraduate laboratory

J Thorn, Matthew Stephen Neel, V. W. Donato +3 more

While the classical, wavelike behavior of light (interference and diffraction) has been easily observed in undergraduate laboratories for many years, explicit observation of the quantum nature of light (i.e., photons) is much more difficult. For example, while well-known phenomena such as the photoelectric effect and Compton scattering strongly suggest the existence of photons, they are not definitive proof of their existence. Here we present an experiment, suitable for an undergraduate laboratory, that unequivocally demonstrates the quantum nature of light. Spontaneously downconverted light is incident on a beamsplitter and the outputs are monitored with single-photon counting detectors. We observe a near absence of coincidence counts between the two detectors—a result inconsistent with a classical wave model of light, but consistent with a quantum description in which individual photons are incident on the beamsplitter. More explicitly, we measured the degree of second-order coherence between the outputs to be g(2)(0)=0.0177±0.0026, which violates the classical inequality g(2)(0)⩾1 by 377 standard deviations.

American Journal of Physics•Aug 13, 2004•131 citations

Differentiating the Superposition Principle from the Measurable Superposition Effects in Interferometry

Chandrasekhar Roychoudhuri

The physical interaction processes behind the emergence of dark and bright fringes registered by the detectors at the output of optical interferometers is explained. This knowledge should be helpful to interferometrists to make better physical interpretations of their data. The belief in mysterious “interference of single indivisible photon” will disappear once we recognize that the spatial or temporal energy re-distributions are generated by the physical transformation experienced by the detecting molecules drawing energy from all the light beams. The molecules could be photodetectors at the interferometer output, or the beam combining dielectric boundary. The superposition principle (SP), represented by the linear mathematical sum of two or more wave amplitudes, does not represent an observable phenomenon. The superposition effect (SE), represented by the non-linear square modulus of the joint dipolar stimulation of the detectors by all the superposed waves, is observable. We present two laboratory experiments to clarify these points. Both classical beam combiners and quantum detectors are capable of generating superposition fringes of intensity variations. The logic of “quantumness” of light is narrowly relevant only when a quantum detector deciphers the fringes; it is not valid for classical beam combiners. We will also discuss “entanglement” based on these experiments.

IntechOpen eBooks•Feb 7, 2019•2 citations

Creating Superposition: The Beam Splitter

Ciaran Hughes, Joshua Isaacson, Anastasia Perry +2 more

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.

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 2021•2 citations
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.
Clear and rigorous quantum reasoning is needed to explain quantum physical phenomena. As pillars of true quantum physical explanations, we suggest specific quantum reasoning derived from quantum physical key ideas. An experiment is suggested to support such a quantum reasoning, in which a quantized radiation field interacts with an optical beam splitter, leading to experimental results conflicting with classical physical predictions. The results, however, can be explained consistently with a quantum reasoning based on the key ideas of probability, superposition, and interference (PSI). In this quantum optical key experiment the optical beam splitter prepares a superposition of single photon states and a Michelson interferometer is used to detect the superposition via controlled propagation phases. Although different single photon experimental setups (aimed at helping students to gain access to foundational issues in quantum physics) have been discussed in the past, the wave-particle dualism bound to classical physics maintains its predominance as an explanation pattern for the interpretation of these experiments. The study presented here investigates the effect of the quantum optical key experiment on the ability of students to use quantum reasoning based on the key ideas of PSI to overcome the naive wave-particle dualism. The current state of relevant studies that test student access to quantum physics can roughly be divided into two distinct areas: one tests how mathematical abilities help them to understand quantum physics and one tests how nonmathematical representations of a set of specific quantum theoretical traits (“Wesenszüge”) lead to a deeper understanding of quantum physics. There is a lack of questionnaires that focus on the idea of developing quantum reasoning based on superposition, probability, and interference of quantum states combined with a real experiment using true quantum light. In the first part of the article, we describe the physical modeling and present the development of the questionnaire. The set of items has been constructed from newly developed items and combined with well-tested ones. The validation of the set addresses qualitative and quantitative methods. In the second part, we give a pre- and poststudy examination of the impact of the quantum optical key experiment on students’ quantum reasoning. A significant increase in the number of students using quantum arguments is based on PSI reasoning for the explanation of an interference, such as the behavior of single photon states. Though the increase is significant, we found only minor changes in a particular issue to the students’ reasoning when approaching quantum physics as illustrated by a sample of answers given in the second part of the article. The concept of quantum states and the principle of superposition still appear particularly difficult. Published by the American Physical Society 2024
This chapter introduces quantum mechanics through the experimental discoveries that revealed the limits of classical physics. Beginning with the historical debate over whether light is a wave or a particle, it examines Young’s double-slit experiment and its modern single-particle versions, which demonstrate that quantum objects can exist in superpositions of mutually exclusive states. The chapter explains how interference arises when alternative possibilities are not measured and how interaction with the environment suppresses these effects through decoherence, giving rise to classical behavior at macroscopic scales. A sequence of thought experiments involving interferometers and Stern–Gerlach devices highlights the counterintuitive structure of quantum measurement and the incompatibility of certain physical properties, as captured by the uncertainty principle. The chapter emphasizes that quantum mechanics does not describe particles taking multiple paths simultaneously in a classical sense but rather requires a new framework for probability based on amplitudes and interference. Finally, the discussion connects these foundational ideas to emerging technologies such as quantum computing, showing how superposition and entanglement can be harnessed to perform computations that have no classical analogue.
One-photon sources are important elements in quantum optics. The archetypal example is an atom raised to an excited state at time t = 0, then de-exciting with emission of a single photon. The development of this kind of source depends on progress with experimental techniques, e.g. the possibility of isolating a single atom, molecule or quantum well. In this complement, we present the formalism for describing the corresponding radiation, and use it to discuss some spectacular experiments which bring out properties quite incompatible with a classical description of the electromagnetic field. We begin in Section 5B.2 by describing the anti-correlation between detections on either side of a semi-reflecting mirror, establishing the quantitative difference with a classical field. Section 5B.3 discusses a quantum optical effect that was only demonstrated at the beginning of the twenty-first century, namely the quantum coalescence of two one-photon wave packets on a semi-reflecting mirror, which occurs even when the two photons were emitted by independent atoms. An analogous effect, the Hong–Hou–Mandel effect, is discussed in Chapter 7. These effects exemplify quantum interference involving two photons. Finally, Section 5B.4 is concerned with quantum calculations involving quasi-classical states. As we now know, this leads to results that are identical to the predictions of semi-classical theory.
While the classical, wavelike behavior of light (interference and diffraction) has been easily observed in undergraduate laboratories for many years, explicit observation of the quantum nature of light (i.e., photons) is much more difficult. For example, while well-known phenomena such as the photoelectric effect and Compton scattering strongly suggest the existence of photons, they are not definitive proof of their existence. Here we present an experiment, suitable for an undergraduate laboratory, that unequivocally demonstrates the quantum nature of light. Spontaneously downconverted light is incident on a beamsplitter and the outputs are monitored with single-photon counting detectors. We observe a near absence of coincidence counts between the two detectors—a result inconsistent with a classical wave model of light, but consistent with a quantum description in which individual photons are incident on the beamsplitter. More explicitly, we measured the degree of second-order coherence between the outputs to be g(2)(0)=0.0177±0.0026, which violates the classical inequality g(2)(0)⩾1 by 377 standard deviations.
The physical interaction processes behind the emergence of dark and bright fringes registered by the detectors at the output of optical interferometers is explained. This knowledge should be helpful to interferometrists to make better physical interpretations of their data. The belief in mysterious “interference of single indivisible photon” will disappear once we recognize that the spatial or temporal energy re-distributions are generated by the physical transformation experienced by the detecting molecules drawing energy from all the light beams. The molecules could be photodetectors at the interferometer output, or the beam combining dielectric boundary. The superposition principle (SP), represented by the linear mathematical sum of two or more wave amplitudes, does not represent an observable phenomenon. The superposition effect (SE), represented by the non-linear square modulus of the joint dipolar stimulation of the detectors by all the superposed waves, is observable. We present two laboratory experiments to clarify these points. Both classical beam combiners and quantum detectors are capable of generating superposition fringes of intensity variations. The logic of “quantumness” of light is narrowly relevant only when a quantum detector deciphers the fringes; it is not valid for classical beam combiners. We will also discuss “entanglement” based on these experiments.
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.