I In the delayed-choice quantum eraser, why is a stepper motor used?

Click For Summary
In the delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment, moving detector D0 is essential to gather data across multiple points, which is necessary to observe an interference pattern. When D0 is stationary, it only measures intensity at a single point, failing to capture the variations needed for interference. The stepper motor facilitates this movement, allowing for a comprehensive analysis of photon counts as D0 scans along its axis. Even without path information from detectors D3 and D4, the movement of D0 is crucial for revealing the interference pattern. Thus, the experiment's design emphasizes the importance of spatial measurement in quantum phenomena.
murtazashab
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
It appears to misunderstand the notion of the detectors D3, D4 providing path information and affecting the results D0.

My question is: When there is no path information being provided, why does the experiment still call for moving D0?

I understand that by moving D0 we can modify the arrival time of the idler photon.

I don't understand, why when there is no path information being provided at D3,D4 do we need to still move D0 in order to obtain an interference pattern.

"During an experiment, detector D0 is scanned along its x axis, its motions controlled by a step motor. A plot of "signal" photon counts detected by D0 versus x can be examined to discover whether the cumulative signal forms an interference pattern. "

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed-choice_quantum_eraser

Why doesn't an interference pattern occur at a stationary D0, when there is no path information being provided at D3,D4?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
murtazashab said:
Why doesn't an interference pattern occur at a stationary D0?
If the detector remains at a single point then all we get is the intensity at that point. An interference pattern is different intensities at different points, so we need to measure at multiple points.
 
@Nugatory thanks for response let me try this. ... Appreciated your efforts...
 

Thread 'Angular Momentum Vector and Its Magnitude'

For the quantum state ##|l,m\rangle= |2,0\rangle## the z-component of angular momentum is zero and ##|L^2|=6 \hbar^2##. According to uncertainty it is impossible to determine the values of ##L_x, L_y, L_z## simultaneously. However, we know that ##L_x## and ## L_y##, like ##L_z##, get the values ##(-2,-1,0,1,2) \hbar##. In other words, for the state ##|2,0\rangle## we have ##\vec{L}=(L_x, L_y,0)## with ##L_x## and ## L_y## one of the values ##(-2,-1,0,1,2) \hbar##. But none of these...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Hossenfelder: Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser, Debunked?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
B Does DCQE show a shift between the two "which path" results?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
I Parametric down-conversion and double-slits
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
I Delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
I Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser with altered beam splitter
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
I Delayed choice quantum eraser -- Again....
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
I Double Slit Interference Question II
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Kim's delayed choice quantum eraser -- Is it really delayed?
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
6K
I Interference of signal photons entangled with idlers
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
I Query on use of prism in delayed choice quantum eraser experiment
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K