Does light wave never collaspe?

  • Thread starter Thread starter scilover89
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light Wave
scilover89
Messages
78
Reaction score
0
1. Observation means interaction in QM.
2. Photon doesn't interact with gravity or electromagnetic force.
3. Thus, light wave is never observed and will therefore maintain superposition.

Is this deduction correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
scilover89 said:
1. Observation means interaction in QM.
Theoretically considered
Observation in QM mechanics means that your state vector \Psi
collapses to one of the eigenvectors \Phi_{n} of the observable (operator).
For example if you measure the energy of an electron in the hydrogen atom,
your state \Psi collapses into one of the energy eigenstates
of the Hamilton-operator (H \Phi_{n} = E_{n} \Phi_{n})
(That's an axiom of QM)

Ok the above example is not about the photon's superposition but it shows
you what measurement means in QM.

So here an example for photons:
An example would be polarizers for light. Say we have a polarizer at 45 degree to the original light polarization. Then there's a certain probability that the wavefunction will collaps into the state that can pass the polarizer.


scilover89 said:
2. Photon doesn't interact with gravity or electromagnetic force.
I am not sure about that. Physicists believe that photons are for example attracted by a black hole due to its great gravity.


scilover89 said:
3. Thus, light wave is never observed and will therefore maintain superposition.
Light is obviously observed because we can see it with our eyes..hmm..
or look at this site: http://www.hqrd.hitachi.co.jp/em/doubleslit.cfm
You can see the photon 'dots' on the screen.

(see my answer to 1)

I think that you are asking yourself how exactly the photon is interacting
with matter, for example photons are scattered by electrons, they are absorbed and emitted by an electron in an atom and so on.

I think someone else can explain that to you with QED (unfortunately I can't tell you anything about QED).

-Edgardo
 
Last edited by a moderator:
scilover, you are confusing two different aspects of physics here. When we say light is of a wave nature, what we really mean is that it's momentum eigenstate has a phase dependence which repeats after 2\pi. This is not the same as the wavefunction which, in general, could be of any shape. It is the wavefunction which collapses.

Secondly, the interaction due to gravity is a different kettle of fish since gravity manifests itself in terms of spacetime curvature. Since all objects inhabit spacetime, they all feel a gravitational "force".
 
scilover89 said:
1. Observation means interaction in QM.
2. Photon doesn't interact with gravity or electromagnetic force.
3. Thus, light wave is never observed and will therefore maintain superposition.

Is this deduction correct?

No.The bolded statement is false.Photons interact with gravity.And certainly among themselves in QFT (for example QED,where they scatter one on another virtual electron-positron fields...)

The underlined statement is false as well.Light can be observed.As you've been given the example with the polarizers;helicity states can descrbe the quantum state of the EM field.And yes,these states collapse.

Daniel.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top