We present a numerical implementation of the proposed Source–Detector Resonance (SDR) as a conceptual analog of a Double-Slit Interference Experiment with discrete particles. Two periodic streams of particles are emitted from two point sources at random integer multiples of a fundamental period P and corresponding frequency ω=2π/P and fly out towards a detection screen. The screen consists of a deep set of identical oscillators with eigenfrequency ω0=2π/P0. In the SDR scenario, ω≈ω0. When the particles reach the screen, they implement a periodic forcing of its oscillators at the stream’s fundamental frequency ω0. As a result, an oscillating pattern develops along the screen. The amplitude of oscillation of each oscillator saturates at a value that is determined by the balance between the periodic particle forcing and the damping of each oscillator. This is clearly proportional to the number of particles that reach a certain oscillator per unit time times the fraction of particles that reach it at its resonant frequency. The latter fraction is equal to the ratio of the Power Spectral Density (PSD) of the time series of the particles that reach the oscillator at its resonance frequency PSD(ω0) over the PSD at zero frequency PSD(0). If we further assume that each oscillator absorbs a particle and announces a detection with a probability that is proportional to the square of the ratio PSD(ω0)/PSD(0); the pattern of particle detections that develops over a thick layer of oscillators is shown to be the same as that of a Double-Slit Interference Experiment. Our result shows that when macroscopic resonant detectors interact with and detect periodic streams of discrete particles, they may create the illusion of an interference measurement, as if each discrete particle manifests a phase of its own.
We present a numerical implementation of the proposed Source–Detector Resonance (SDR) as a conceptual analog of a Double-Slit Interference Experiment with discrete particles. Two periodic streams of particles are emitted from two point sources at random integer multiples of a fundamental period P and corresponding frequency ω=2π/P and fly out towards a detection screen. The screen consists of a deep set of identical oscillators with eigenfrequency ω0=2π/P0. In the SDR scenario, ω≈ω0. When the particles reach the screen, they implement a periodic forcing of its oscillators at the stream’s fundamental frequency ω0. As a result, an oscillating pattern develops along the screen. The amplitude of oscillation of each oscillator saturates at a value that is determined by the balance between the periodic particle forcing and the damping of each oscillator. This is clearly proportional to the number of particles that reach a certain oscillator per unit time times the fraction of particles that reach it at its resonant frequency. The latter fraction is equal to the ratio of the Power Spectral Density (PSD) of the time series of the particles that reach the oscillator at its resonance frequency PSD(ω0) over the PSD at zero frequency PSD(0). If we further assume that each oscillator absorbs a particle and announces a detection with a probability that is proportional to the square of the ratio PSD(ω0)/PSD(0); the pattern of particle detections that develops over a thick layer of oscillators is shown to be the same as that of a Double-Slit Interference Experiment. Our result shows that when macroscopic resonant detectors interact with and detect periodic streams of discrete particles, they may create the illusion of an interference measurement, as if each discrete particle manifests a phase of its own.
We consider a particular model of a Source of independent particles and a macroscopic Detector that are both tuned to the same resonance frequency ν0≡1/P. Particles are emitted by the Source at exact multiples of the resonance period P, and the Detector absorbs them with a certain probability at any one of its points. The Detector may also announce the detection of the absorbed particle. Any particle that is not absorbed at a certain point passes through to a deeper layer in the interior of the Detector. Eventually, all particles will be absorbed, i.e., detected. We calculate the probability of detection for two particle time series generated by the same Source reaching the Detector with a time delay of δt and show that it manifests the illusion of collective (wave-like) interference with particle number conservation. We conclude that wave phenomena may reflect the nature of detectors rather than fundamental laws of physics.
We present a statistical model of non-interacting individual classical particles that may lead to a microscopic implementation of quantum mechanics. The model requires the action of a special type of detector that detects and records individual particles. According to our model, microscopic particles are classical entities that follow classical trajectories without nonlocal interactions between them. As long as they remain undetected, particles carry the information of a phase equal to an action integral along their trajectory. At the point of their detection, our special type of detector collects the phases from all particles reaching it, adds them up over time as complex numbers, and divides them by the square root of their number. The detector records a detection each time the square of the magnitude of the ensuing vector crosses an integer value. We test our model with numerical simulations of a double-slit experiment, and obtain an interference pattern analogous to the one observed in an actual physical experiment.
According to R. Feynman 1963-1965 [10], the interference pattern that appears on the observation screen in the double-slit experiment with light cannot be explained by classical physics. The detection probability is supposed to result from the superposition of all paths that the photon can take from the source to the detector, the light quantum is self-interfering. However, Jin et al. 2010 [11] showed that this is not necessarily the case. In their computer simulation, they assumed that the trajectory of a photon corresponds to that of a classical particle. Thus, the interference only occurs at the detector with the participation of several photons. Not every photon causes a detection.Tiefenbrunner 2024 [17] investigated the detector further and recognized that particle interference under this and some other conditions presupposes a monochromatic resonator (all permissible energy levels are integer (ℕ0) multiples of a basal energy unit ε, where ε is also referred to as the ‘colour’ of the resonator). A monochromatic two-state system, e.g. a molecule that can only exist in two energetic states (ground and excited) and can only absorb one quantum (with respect to one ‘colour’), is, however, not sufficient for this. This prompted an evaluation of the significance of the monochromatic resonator for the Boltzmann-factor and Planck's radiation law. It turns out that the Boltzmann-factor and thus also the radiation law require resonators and hence are incompatible with two-state systems. The radiation law is derived using a kinetic model for the interaction of light with matter and without a priori use of the Boltzmann-factor, whereby it is also assumed that photons follow classical trajectories.
A fundamental principle of quantum theory, clearly manifested in the two-slit experiment, is that for any alternatives that cannot be distinguished by measurement physical predictions are obtained by summation of their amplitudes. In particle oscillation experiments, a particle's time of detection is not directly measured, consequently, the detection probability should involve the summation over amplitudes corresponding to different detection times. However, in contrast to the principle above, standard treatments involve summation over probabilities rather than amplitudes; this implicitly assumes the existence of a decohering mechanism. In this work, we construct the detection probabilities for particle oscillations by summation over amplitudes, corresponding to different detection times. The resulting wavelength of particle oscillations differs from the standard expression by a factor of two. Moreover, we predict a dependence of the oscillation wavelength on the threshold of the decay process used for detection.
Within the framework of the ‘Pairwise Interference Model’ of light–matter interaction, it is postulated that light particles follow definite trajectories, and thus, for example, in the double-slit experiment, a particle can pass through only one of the two slits. On this premise, the interference of two photons is examined in greater detail. It is hypothesized that the interference of a photon pair requires the involvement of matter and, initially, that both molecular excitations and photons oscillate at the same frequency and that the continuity of the oscillation is not disrupted by absorption and emission. The molecular excitations in the light source are supposed to oscillate synchronously. Both photons arrive at the same point on the detector but may travel along different paths and therefore arrive at different times. Under these conditions, their phase difference, φ(2) – φ(1), is always zero. Consequently, no interference pattern can form on the detector screen and therefore the assumptions made are incorrect. Alternatively, one may assume that only the photon oscillates, whereas the excitation stores the phase, φ, possessed by the photon at the instant of absorption. In this case, φ(2) – φ(1) corresponds to the difference in travel times modulo the oscillation period, and an interference pattern can form. However, this assumption is problematic for some reasons: the nature of the matter-based memory remains unclear; according to the special theory of relativity, no time elapses for a particle travelling at the speed of light, meaning that it cannot oscillate; and the assumption contradicts Bohr’s correspondence principle. In a classical wave, the phase information propagates away from the source at the wave velocity without changing. This leads to the alternative possibility that the excitations oscillate, whereas the photons do not. Instead, the photons transport information about the phase of the excitation at the instant of emission. As can be shown, in this case, φ(2) – φ(1) likewise corresponds to the difference in travel times modulo the oscillation period. However, this hypothesis contradicts the de Broglie postulate, according to which all particles exhibit wave properties, and the relation ε = hν must therefore be interpreted differently. It also raises the question of how the dimensions of a laser, specifically the mirror separation, can influence the wavelength of the amplified light if a photon has no wavelength. Using replicator dynamics and the ‘Pairwise Interference Model’ of light–matter interaction, a simulation demonstrates that, in a simplified laser model, assuming that photons do not oscillate whereas excitations do, self-organisation gives rise to a phase pattern in the sequence of photons within the emitted light beam that corresponds to the pattern obtained by discretising a classical wave. Thus, coherent light can exhibit wave properties even if photons themselves do not. Finally, the possibility of how incoherent light acquires wave properties is briefly discussed.
I argue that the marquis characteristics of the quantum-mechanical double-slit experiment (point detection, random distribution, Born rule) can be explained using Schroedinger's equation alone, if one takes into account that, for any atom in a detector, there is a small but nonzero gap between its excitation energy and the excitation energies of all other relevant atoms in the detector (isolated-levels assumption). To illustrate the point I introduce a toy model of a detector. The form of the model follows common practice in quantum optics and cavity QED. Each detector atom can be resonantly excited by the incoming particle, and then emit a detection signature (e.g. bright flash of light) or dissipate its energy thermally. Different atoms have slightly different resonant energies per the isolated-levels assumption, and the projectile preferentially excites the atom with the closest energy match. The toy model permits one easily to estimate the probability that any atom is resonantly excited, and also that a detection signature is produced before being overtaken by thermal dissipation. The end-to-end detection probability is the product of these two probabilities, and is proportional to the absolute square of the incoming wavefunction at the atom in question, i.e. the Born rule. I consider how closely a published neutron-interference experiment conforms to the picture developed here; I show how this paper's analysis steers clear of creating a scenario with local hidden variables; I show how the analysis steers clear of the irreversibility implicit in the projection postulate; and I discuss possible experimental tests of this paper's ideas. Hopefully, this is a significant step toward realizing the program of solving the measurement problem within unitary quantum mechanics envisioned by Landsman, among others.