Parametric down-conversion and double-slits

In summary, the delayed-choice quantum eraser (DCQE) experiment from Kim et al. 1999 shows that interference can only be seen by comparing different detector results from the erasers and which-path detectors. Removing the idler detectors and leaving the entangled beams does not result in an interference pattern at the signal beam detector, as the original single photon no longer exists after down-conversion. The interference patterns in the "post-processed" detections come from the correlations of the two entangled photons in the final two-photon state. To see an interference pattern at the signal beam detector, a different type of idler beam meshing apparatus or a marking/filtering apparatus that does not add which-way information would be needed.
  • #1
rodd
1
0
TL;DR Summary
How can we restore the visible double-slit interference and have SPDC-entangled light beams simultaneously?
I'm fascinated by the delayed-choice quantum eraser (DCQE) experiment from Kim et al. 1999.

1588077819901.png


As I understand from the paper, the observer at the signal beam detector d0 (the screen) never sees an interference pattern, but the "lump" sum of all possible outcomes at the idler photon detectors. Interference can only be seen by retroactively (classically) comparing different detector results from d1, d2 (erasers) and d3, d4 (which-path).

But there's something I don't quite grasp.

Now let's suppose you completely remove all idler detectors d1 to d4 from the experiment but leave the SPDC apparatus with its entangled beams and having the idler beam undetected (ie. pointing the idler beams to space), will the observer ever experience an interference pattern at d0? Did spontaneous parametric down-conversion at the BBO crystal destroy the self-interference superposition of the signal beam? But, if yes, then where do the interference patterns in the "post-processed" detections come from exactly? As I understand the original double-slit superposition has not been destroyed and an interference pattern should be visible somehow.

In other words, is there any way to see an interference at d0 while keeping the BBO/Glan-Thompson SPDC beamsplitter positioned after the double-slit? Maybe some other type of idler beam meshing apparatus (lens, mirrors, prisms...) is needed to erase the which-path info completely?

Or maybe some marking or filtering apparatus that does not add which-way path information be added to the post-entangled signal beam so that the double signal beams, which are red and blue colored in the diagram, could form a visible interference pattern at d0?
 

Attachments

  • 1588077581422.png
    11.1 KB · Views: 121
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
rodd said:
Now let's suppose you completely remove all idler detectors d1 to d4 from the experiment but leave the SPDC apparatus with its entangled beams and having the idler beam undetected (ie. pointing the idler beams to space), will the observer ever experience an interference pattern at d0?
No.

rodd said:
Did spontaneous parametric down-conversion at the BBO crystal destroy the self-interference superposition of the signal beam?
Yes.

rodd said:
But, if yes, then where do the interference patterns in the "post-processed" detections come from exactly?
From the correlations of the two entangled photons in the final two-photon state.

rodd said:
As I understand the original double-slit superposition has not been destroyed and an interference pattern should be visible somehow.
The original single photon does not longer exist after the down-conversion, and obviously you cannot see the interference pattern of something that doesn't longer exist.
 

1. What is parametric down-conversion?

Parametric down-conversion is a process in which a single photon is split into two lower energy photons, known as signal and idler photons, through the use of a nonlinear crystal. This process is used in quantum optics experiments to create entangled photon pairs.

2. How does parametric down-conversion relate to double-slits?

In double-slit experiments, a single photon is sent through two slits and produces an interference pattern on a screen. When entangled photon pairs are used in this experiment, the signal photon is sent through one slit and the idler photon through the other. The interference pattern produced by the signal photon is affected by the path of the idler photon, demonstrating the entanglement of the two photons.

3. What is the significance of double-slits in quantum mechanics?

The double-slit experiment is a fundamental experiment in quantum mechanics that demonstrates the wave-particle duality of light. It shows that particles, such as photons, can exhibit both wave-like and particle-like behavior, and that their behavior can be affected by observation.

4. Can parametric down-conversion be used for practical applications?

Yes, parametric down-conversion has practical applications in quantum communication and cryptography. It can also be used for high-resolution imaging and sensing, as well as in quantum computing.

5. Are there any challenges or limitations with parametric down-conversion and double-slits?

One challenge is the difficulty in creating and controlling entangled photon pairs. Another limitation is that the interference pattern produced by the entangled photons is affected by environmental factors, making it difficult to reproduce the same results consistently. Additionally, the use of entangled photons in practical applications is still in the early stages and requires further research and development.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
694
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
644
Replies
8
Views
902
Replies
2
Views
932
Replies
19
Views
958
Replies
4
Views
815
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
283
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Back
Top