High School Detecting a photon passing through a slit without destroying it?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the detection of photons passing through slits and the implications for interference patterns. It is established that detecting a photon does not necessarily involve measuring the photon itself; rather, one can observe the photon's effect on the slit, such as measuring the recoil. The conversation highlights that nondestructive detection methods, such as using polarizers, can influence whether interference patterns form based on their orientation. Specifically, if polarizers are parallel, interference occurs; if perpendicular, it does not.

PREREQUISITES
  • Quantum mechanics fundamentals
  • Photon behavior and properties
  • Understanding of interference patterns
  • Polarization of light
NEXT STEPS
  • Research nondestructive photon detection methods
  • Study the role of polarizers in quantum optics
  • Explore the concept of photon recoil and its implications
  • Learn about the double-slit experiment and its variations
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, quantum mechanics students, optical engineers, and anyone interested in the principles of light behavior and quantum detection methods.

Cato
Messages
56
Reaction score
10
TL;DR
I occasionally read descriptions of the double slit experiment in which the author says something like, "If a detector is place at each slit so that we know which slit the photon passsed through, the interefence patten does not form." Is this even possible? Is it possible to detect a passing photon and have it remain a photon? An electron, yes, but a photon?
I cannot see how a photon can be detected and yet remain the same photon. I am thinking that the description "If a detector is place at each slit so that we know which slit the photon passsed through, the interefence patten does not form" is sloppy and in error.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Cato said:
I cannot see how a photon can be detected and yet remain the same photon.

First, you don't have to detect the photon itself to know which slit it passed through. You could detect the photon's effect on the slit.

Second, there are nondestructive ways of detecting photons, as a simple Google search will show you.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
Isn't detecting the photon's effect on the slit the same as detecting the photon? And wouldn't that change the energy of the photon? Same for the second -- wouldn't detecting a photon nondestructively change the photon? Is it possible to detect a photon without altering its energy? So that an interference pattern would not be created not because we "knew" which slit the photon passed through, but because the energy of the photon was changed in the process of being nondestructively detected?
 
Cato said:
Isn't detecting the photon's effect on the slit the same as detecting the photon?

No. For example, you could measure the recoil of the slit as the photon passes through it and interacts with it. That does not involve any measurement of the photon.

Cato said:
wouldn't that change the energy of the photon?

The photon might not even have a definite energy to begin with. But it will certainly change the behavior of the photon, since detecting which slit the photon went through destroys the interference pattern.

Cato said:
wouldn't detecting a photon nondestructively change the photon?

See above.

Cato said:
So that an interference pattern would not be created not because we "knew" which slit the photon passed through, but because the energy of the photon was changed in the process of being nondestructively detected?

These aren't two different alternatives. They're two different descriptions of the same process.
 
Cato said:
I cannot see how a photon can be detected and yet remain the same photon. I am thinking that the description "If a detector is place at each slit so that we know which slit the photon passsed through, the interefence patten does not form" is sloppy and in error.

PeterDonis is correct. If you place polarizers in front of each slit, their relative orientation controls whether there is interference or not. If they are parallel, there IS interference.

But if they are perpendicular, there is NO interference. It is possible in this case to determine whether the photons went through one slit or the other (even if you do not attempt to determine that). So of course there is no interference, and the light gets through.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
6K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
8K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K