Quantum Interference: Is There a Size Limit?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter dt19
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of quantum interference and whether there is a size limit to the particles that can exhibit such effects. Participants explore the implications of quantum theory on larger systems and the role of decoherence in observing quantum phenomena.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant references a book discussing double slit interference with larger particles, specifically 'buckyballs', and questions if there is a size limit to quantum effects.
  • Another participant suggests that there may not be an upper limit to the size of particles that can show quantum interference, proposing two views: one that supports a macroscopic limit and another that does not.
  • Decoherence is introduced as a significant factor that complicates the observation of quantum interference at larger scales, with one participant explaining how environmental interactions can entangle quantum states, leading to suppression of observable interference.
  • A participant questions whether quantum theory itself limits the visibility of its effects on larger scales, leading to a discussion on decoherence as a mechanism that prevents observable quantum phenomena.
  • One participant shares a link to research on matterwave interference but expresses skepticism about the convincingness of the results presented.
  • Another participant acknowledges a lack of understanding regarding the technical details of decoherence and expresses gratitude for the shared resources.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether there is a size limit to quantum interference, with some suggesting that no limit exists while others emphasize the role of decoherence in limiting observable effects. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of decoherence and its dependence on environmental factors, which may not be fully understood or agreed upon. The discussion highlights the challenges in observing quantum effects as systems increase in size.

dt19
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
i'm reading Quantum: A Guide For The Perplexed at the moment. There's a bit in it about a group who managed to show double slit quantum interference with 'buckyballs' (i think they're carbon atoms) which are naturally a lot larger than electrons, so i was wondering - does anyone know if there's a limit to the size of the particles used to show the interference? is there some kind of size limit to quantum effects?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That's the 10^6 $ question :smile:

In fact, there does not need to be any upper limit. There are essentially two different kinds of views on quantum theory: those that claim that there is a "macroscopic" limit (with projection), and those that don't. This is just to say that it is *conceivable* that quantum interference is _potentially_ thinkable for arbitrary large systems.

Each time someone talks about "the wavefunction of the universe" he's assuming that nothing is too big. But in fact, we don't know whether that's sensible or not.
The reason is that there are effects (decoherence effects) which make it harder and harder to observe quantum interference effects on large scales (decoherence is entirely explained itself also as a quantum effect).
 
so does quantum theory itself prevent us from seeing it's effects on our sort of scale?
 
Is this it?

http://www.quantum.univie.ac.at/research/matterwave/c60/index.html

If so I don't find it entirely convincing. Again there aren't that many points on the graphs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
dt19 said:
so does quantum theory itself prevent us from seeing it's effects on our sort of scale?

Yes. It is called decoherence. Have a look at:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-decoherence/

The essence is this: when a quantum system has two components which could show interference (its state is |a> + |b> say), and these two components interact differently with some part of the environment, then the environment entangles with the two components. Now, the environment being a complicated system with a lot of uncontrolled degrees of freedom, the state is now |a>|envA> + |b>|envB> and every attempt to do an interference experiment will now not have an amplitude <a|a> + <b|b> + 2 Re{<a|b>} ; where the last term is the interference term which indicates quantum effects, but rather:
<a|a><envA|envA> + <b|b><envB|envB> + 2 Re{<a|b><envA|envB>}

and due to the complexity and the uncontrolledness of the environment, in most cases, <envA|envB> ~ 0, so this suppresses any observable interference. The reason is that in most basis, envA and envB are essentially random vectors of high dimensionality, and the in-product of random vectors of high dimensionality is usually very close to 0.
 
Farsight: I'm not sure, I can't remember who the experiment was attributed to.

vanesch: thanks for the link, but i don't understand the bit underneath that you wrote (i haven't done any advanced physics) but thanks anyway.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
9K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
525
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
6K