Abstract Through the classic work of Planck, Einstein, and others the particle nature of the photon has been established. In the previous chapter we considered the wave field of the photon. In this chapter we will emphasize more its particle nature and discuss the extent to which a wave function with a probabilistic interpretation is an appropriate description. Once we have the concept of a particle it is natural to ask how localized the state can be. The degree of localizability of photons is of concern in the interpretation of experiments in quantum optics involving weak light sources and non-linear electromagnetic media. If a photon is not to have the structure of a composite particle its quantum states should be describable by translations, rotations, and Lorentz boosts of a particular state and possibly super positions of such states. This is equivalent to a photon being associated with an irreducible representation of the Poincaré group. A brief overview of the general theory of group representations is given in Appendix 3. We will be able to give a complete discussion of the representations of the Poincaré group pertinent to the photon. Our discussion of localizability will be quite rigorous but we will gloss over measure-theoretic niceties. For more mathematical discussions the reader can refer to the works of Mackey (1978) and Wightman (1962). We will finish the chapter by examining the implication of Poincaré invariance for the metric on the space of quantum states of the photon.
Abstract Through the classic work of Planck, Einstein, and others the particle nature of the photon has been established. In the previous chapter we considered the wave field of the photon. In this chapter we will emphasize more its particle nature and discuss the extent to which a wave function with a probabilistic interpretation is an appropriate description. Once we have the concept of a particle it is natural to ask how localized the state can be. The degree of localizability of photons is of concern in the interpretation of experiments in quantum optics involving weak light sources and non-linear electromagnetic media. If a photon is not to have the structure of a composite particle its quantum states should be describable by translations, rotations, and Lorentz boosts of a particular state and possibly super positions of such states. This is equivalent to a photon being associated with an irreducible representation of the Poincaré group. A brief overview of the general theory of group representations is given in Appendix 3. We will be able to give a complete discussion of the representations of the Poincaré group pertinent to the photon. Our discussion of localizability will be quite rigorous but we will gloss over measure-theoretic niceties. For more mathematical discussions the reader can refer to the works of Mackey (1978) and Wightman (1962). We will finish the chapter by examining the implication of Poincaré invariance for the metric on the space of quantum states of the photon.
You might think that the great success of quantum electrodynamics (QED) would settle the debate on the nature of light to provide a clear view of its behavior, where the photon is regarded as the unit of excitation associated with a quantized mode of the electromagnetic (radiation) eld. However, Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle tells us that a state of denite momentum, energy, and polarization associated with a plane wave used as a basis function of quantization must be completely indenite in space and time. It suggests the diµculty of spatial localization of a photon as a particle. In fact, Newton and Wigner showed that a free photon, as a massless particle with spin 1, has no localized states on the basis of natural invariance requirements that localized states for which operators of the Lorentz group apply should be orthogonal to the undisplaced localized states, a§er a translation (Newton and Wigner 1949). According to them, one can obtain a general expression for a position operator for massive particles and for massless particles of spin 0 or 1/2, not for massless particles with nite spin, which indicates that there is no probability density for the position of the photon, and thus a position-representation wave function cannot be consistently introduced. It has also been shown that photons are not localizable, on the basis of imprimitive representations of the Euclidean group (Wightman 1962). It is now believed that photons are only weakly localizable, although single-photon states with arbitrarily fast asymptotic fallo of energy density exist, and that a lack of strict localizability is directly related to the absence of a position operator for a photon in free space and a positionrepresentation photon wave function (Hawton 1999).
A brief account of the connection between the photon little group and gauge in- variance is given, considering the four-potential as the wave function of the photon. In most textbooks single photons are associated to the quanta of monochromatic plane-wave components of the electromagnetic field. However, polychromatic superposition of such states may also represent single photons. Having established the framework for polychromatic single-photon states in Hilbert space, and upon a discussion of the mean value and variance of the photon Hamilton operator for polychromatic states, we turn our attention to- wards the single-photon description in direct space. A photon wave function in direct space is obtained via the inner product of the photon mean position state (introduced in Chapter 3 ) and the Hilbert space polychromatic single-photon state. Noting that the photon is a relativistic object a rigorous polychromatic photon wave function is, in the continuum superposition of monochromatic plane-wave components, obtained noting the form of the relativistically invari- ant volume element in wave-vector space. We establish a wave-packet basis for single-photon states in Hilbert space, and the related photon wave functions. Thereafter, multi-photon wave packets are discussed, and the equal-time com- mutator relations between the wave packets are discussed, and the equal-time commutator relations between the wave-packet annihilation and creation oper- ators set up. As an example, we focus on two-photon wave packet states. We finish the chapter by a discussion of the two-photon concept and two-photon wave mechanics, analysing in particular the physical difference between two photons and bi-photons (an entangled state of two photons).
In this chapter we build up the basic concepts of quantum mechanics using two simple examples, following a heuristic approach which is more inductive than deductive. We start with a familiar phenomenon, that of the polarization of light, which will allow us to introduce the necessary mathematical formalism. We show that the description of polarization leads naturally to the need for a two-dimensional complex vector space, and we establish the correspondence between a polarization state and a vector in this space, referred to as the space of polarization states. We then move on to the quantum description of photon polarization and illustrate the construction of probability amplitudes as scalar products in this space. The second example will be that of spin 1/2, where the space of states is again two-dimensional. We construct the most general states of spin 1/2 using rotational invariance. Finally, we introduce dynamics, which allows us to follow the time evolution of a state vector. The analogy with the polarization of light will serve as a guide to constructing the quantum theory of photon polarization, but no such classical analog is available for constructing the quantum theory for spin 1/2. In this case the quantum theory will be constructed without reference to any classical theory, using an assumption about the dimension of the space of states and symmetry principles. The polarization of light and photon polarization The polarization of an electromagnetic wave The polarization of light or, more generally, of an electromagnetic wave, is a familiar phenomenon related to the vector nature of the electromagnetic field. Let us consider a plane wave of monochromatic light of frequency ω propagating in the positive z direction.
During these three years we focused on several topics in quantum otpics and quantum electrodynamics. A central theme in our investigations is that of the photon wave function. Can quantum optics and quantum electrodynamics experiments be described simply, in position space, with the help of a wave function describing the photon(s) featured in the experiment ? The answer to that question is not quite obvious: the usual description of photons takes place in the reciprocal space of wave vectors. But these experiments call for a wave mechanical description in the position representation, as is done in quantum mechanics textbooks in situations featuring massive particles. Moreover, in a recent experiment [1], single photon trajectories through a Young two-slit setup have been observed. In order to try and describe these trajectories formally, it is natural to build a wave mechanical formalism for photons. We therefore studied in detail the formal construction of the photon wave function, an object which was little studied until the 1990s. We also studied the properties of the photon wave function in the presence of sources.To do that, we considered several open (interacting) quantum systems. We saw that there exists in principle an infinite number of possibilities when defining the photon wave function. We emphasised several criteria on the basis of which it appears that only three choices for the wave function are interesting. One of them coincides with an object introduced and used by Glauber [2] to study light detection andthe correlations of the electromagnetic field in the quantum regime. We also saw that, in the absence of sources, the propagation equation for a single photon is formally equivalent to Maxwell’s equations. At low photon numbers, the wave function formalism can be very useful. We adapted it to interacting systems,first, to cavity quantum electrodynamics (QED) [3], in particular to the experiments carried out by Serge Haroche’s group [4]. We proposed a simple model to describe photons in QED cavities. With this model, and with the helpof the photon wave function, we studied the propagation of photons escaping a cavity. We also constructed the Lindblad master equation without introducing nonunitary quantum jumps (also see [5]). We finally investigated the spacetime evolution of a photon which is emitted during the decay of an atomic electron. After having carefully studied the dynamics of the electronic decay, especially at very short times [6, 7], we set out to describe the emitted electromagnetic field as rigorously as possible. This emitted field, surprisingly, does not evolve causally. Though this is not entirely unexpected in view of Hegerfeldt’s theorem, which states [8] that causality is impossible for quantum systems which are described by a Hamiltonian with a spectrum which is bounded by below, we identified [9] two other sources of non causality. One of them was predicted qualitatively by Shirokov [10], while the other one, which is completely new as far as we can tell, is still to be better understood
Since wavelets form a representation of the Poincare group, it is possible to construct a localized superposition of light waves with different frequencies in a Lorentz-covariant manner. This localized wavelet satisfies a Lorentz-invariant uncertainty relation, and also the Lorentz-invariant Parseval's relation. A quantitative analysis is given for the difference between photons and localized waves. It is then shown that this localized entity corresponds to a relativistic photon with a sharply defined momentum in the non-localization limit. Waves are not particles. It is confirmed that the wave-particle duality is subject to the uncertainty principle.
According to modern quantum field theory all elementary particles are quantum excitations of an underlying quantum field. In the case of the photon the underlying field is the electromagnetic field. In photon wave mechanics the photon concept was reached by a reinterpretation of the physical meaning of the free classical electromagnetic field. Such a reinterpretation does not give us a quantum theory of light quanta because the elementary quantum of action is foreign to classical physics. Although Planck’s constant does occur in the various Schro¨dinger-like wave equations we have presented in Part III it just plays the role of a multiplicative factor, see e.g., Eq. (10.36). The “justification” for bringing ~ into the formalism is the wish to make contact to the Einstein-de Broglie relations [Eqs. (10.40) and (10.41)]. In a sense one may call the light particle appearing from classical electrodynamics the classical photon.