Measuring photon momentum without annihilating it

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility of measuring the momentum of a photon without annihilating it, exploring the theoretical implications and potential apparatus designs. Participants consider the principles of quantum mechanics and the nature of wave packets in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes the idea of an apparatus that could measure the momentum of a localized light wave packet while converting it into a plane wave, questioning the nature of such a device.
  • Another participant challenges the feasibility of measuring a photon's momentum without destroying it, suggesting that scattering experiments might provide a way to infer momentum through target recoil.
  • There is a discussion about the uncertainty principle, where one participant draws an analogy to the single slit experiment, suggesting that precise momentum measurement could lead to increased uncertainty in position.
  • A participant expresses interest in the possibility of a "black box" momentum measuring device that could theoretically exist, asking for clarification on its validity and operational specifics according to quantum mechanics.
  • Another participant expands the discussion to consider whether similar principles could be applied to other particles, such as electrons, if measuring photon momentum proves impractical.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the feasibility of measuring photon momentum without annihilation, with multiple competing views and uncertainties remaining regarding the theoretical and practical implications.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations related to the assumptions about the nature of wave packets and the implications of quantum mechanics, particularly concerning measurement precision and the uncertainty principle.

Swamp Thing
Insights Author
Messages
1,048
Reaction score
799
Is it possible to build an apparatus that could do the following (at least ideally in principle)? If so, what would it be like?

A fairly localized light wave packet (with a corresponding spread in momentum) reaches the origin of our coordinate system from any direction in the XY plane (taking 2 dimensional case for simplicity).

It now interacts with the apparatus.

After the interaction, a pointer points along a certain direction which is the direction of the measured momentum. Another analog pointer with a scale shows the magnitude of the momentum. (Or maybe two pointers for the X and Y momentum respectively).

Meanwhile, the wave packet is instantly (?) converted into a highly extended, nearly plane wave -- ideally extending over all of space, since it has to be a momentum eigenstate. Of course, the pointer readings have to be consistent with the wave number of this extended wave.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The usual wisdom is that you cannot interact with a photon without destroying it...
Take care you are not conflating the QM wave-packet with an electromagnetic wave packet. In QM, the photon is a packet of energy ... the "wave-packet" is a mathematical construct encoding the statistical behaviour of photons in general in that situation.

You seem to be asking if one can, in practise, measure the momentum of a photon arbitrarily precisely, and still have a photon of some kind afterwards.
For instance - maybe you can do a scattering experiment and infer the (initial) momentum off the target recoil?
The scattered photon won't have the same momentum as the incoming photon - some went into the recoil.

What you ,may want to try is finding out how photon momenta may be measured ... how precisely can you measure it without having to absorb the photon... that boils down to how small a recoil you can measure.

Of course, in principle, the maths allows us to contemplate the ideal case...
The single narrow slit kinda measures position carefully, making (a component of) momentum very uncertain, resulting in a distribution of photons on a screen - are you looking for an analogous description where some ideal apparatus measures momentum precisely but leaves position uncertain? i.e. you know the momentum but you don't know where the measurement was taken?
 
Simon Bridge said:
are you looking for an analogous description where some ideal apparatus measures momentum precisely but leaves position uncertain? i.e. you know the momentum but you don't know where the measurement was taken?

Yes, that is pretty close to what I'm looking for. Only, I think that "where the measurement was taken" could be fairly localized if the incoming wave is prepared as a fairly compact wave function, approaching zero outside a reasonable sized volume. But after the measurement, the particle's probability of being found (by a subsequent position measurement) would be much more spread out if our momentum measurement is really precise. On the other hand, repeated momentum measurements should keep giving the same answer, preserving the particle in the same state. (Just like the well known behaviour of Stern Gerlach and polarizers etc.)

So I guess my question has two parts. Firstly, if we just assume that a "black box" momentum measuring device exists whose precision can be squeezed down as close as we like, then is my description valid according to QM. And secondly - if it is theoretically valid - then can we try to be more specific as to how this black box would work?
 
Last edited:
Also, if it is not feasible to do this with photons without destroying them, we could consider anything else like an electron. The point is how to practically demonstrate the principle with actual apparatus for any particle.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K