Order of Interference - 1st, 2nd, 4th - What Does It Mean?

  • Thread starter Thread starter yefeiwen
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Interference
yefeiwen
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone, I am reading some paper about quantum interference experiments. They mentioned some experiments are first-order interference, some are second-order interference, some are fourth-order interference. What do these mean? And why I never read anything about a "third-order" interference?
thanks
Ye
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is this by any chance the Bennett, et al, paper: PR A 77 023803 feb'08? Apparently the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degree_of_coherence" (accidental pun?) have been used for decades (since Glauber?); not sure whether they have a simple physical interpretation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi, I'm Raj Patel and I'm actually working with Anthony Bennett at Toshiba, we have a couple more papers on two-photon interference being published in APL and PRL (within the next week or so)... in the meantime http://arxiv.org/abs/0804.1897 , http://arxiv.org/abs/0803.3700. In the PRL paper I measure first and second-order coherence functions.

To answer your question the degree of interference, first-order coherence and second-order interference are considered the same thing. And second-order coherence and fourth-order interference are also considered the same thing.

First-order coherence is what you would measure if you shone light into a Michelson interferometer and observe interference fringes. Essentially this is a single-photon interference experiment - interference between the probability amplitudes of a photon taking a particular route through the interferometer. It is a measure of correlations between field amplitudes and it is second order in the field amplitudes.

Second order coherence basically describes correlations between field intensities between two points. It is fourth order in field amplitudes. A common test of how good a single photon source is to measure the second-order correlation function. This is basically achieved by firing photons at a beamsplitter and placing a detector equidistant from each output port of a 50:50 beamsplitter. If it's a perfect single photon source you will never measure simultaneous detection events.

Hope that clarifies things a bit.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes Demystifier
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In her YouTube video Bell’s Theorem Experiments on Entangled Photons, Dr. Fugate shows how polarization-entangled photons violate Bell’s inequality. In this Insight, I will use quantum information theory to explain why such entangled photon-polarization qubits violate the version of Bell’s inequality due to John Clauser, Michael Horne, Abner Shimony, and Richard Holt known as the...
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...
I asked a question related to a table levitating but I am going to try to be specific about my question after one of the forum mentors stated I should make my question more specific (although I'm still not sure why one couldn't have asked if a table levitating is possible according to physics). Specifically, I am interested in knowing how much justification we have for an extreme low probability thermal fluctuation that results in a "miraculous" event compared to, say, a dice roll. Does a...
Back
Top