Parametric down-conversion and double-slits

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the delayed-choice quantum eraser (DCQE) experiment by Kim et al. (1999) and the implications of spontaneous parametric down-conversion (SPDC) on interference patterns. It is established that removing idler detectors d1 to d4 while retaining the SPDC apparatus results in no observable interference pattern at detector d0. The original double-slit superposition is destroyed by the SPDC process at the BBO crystal, leading to the conclusion that interference patterns in post-processed detections arise from correlations between the entangled photons in the final two-photon state.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of delayed-choice quantum eraser (DCQE) experiments
  • Knowledge of spontaneous parametric down-conversion (SPDC) and its implications
  • Familiarity with the double-slit experiment and quantum superposition
  • Basic principles of quantum entanglement and photon detection
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the mechanics of spontaneous parametric down-conversion in detail
  • Research the implications of quantum entanglement on interference patterns
  • Study the experimental setup and results of the delayed-choice quantum eraser
  • Investigate alternative methods for observing interference patterns in quantum experiments
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, researchers in quantum optics, and students studying advanced quantum mechanics concepts will benefit from this discussion.

rodd
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
How can we restore the visible double-slit interference and have SPDC-entangled light beams simultaneously?
I'm fascinated by the delayed-choice quantum eraser (DCQE) experiment from Kim et al. 1999.

1588077819901.png


As I understand from the paper, the observer at the signal beam detector d0 (the screen) never sees an interference pattern, but the "lump" sum of all possible outcomes at the idler photon detectors. Interference can only be seen by retroactively (classically) comparing different detector results from d1, d2 (erasers) and d3, d4 (which-path).

But there's something I don't quite grasp.

Now let's suppose you completely remove all idler detectors d1 to d4 from the experiment but leave the SPDC apparatus with its entangled beams and having the idler beam undetected (ie. pointing the idler beams to space), will the observer ever experience an interference pattern at d0? Did spontaneous parametric down-conversion at the BBO crystal destroy the self-interference superposition of the signal beam? But, if yes, then where do the interference patterns in the "post-processed" detections come from exactly? As I understand the original double-slit superposition has not been destroyed and an interference pattern should be visible somehow.

In other words, is there any way to see an interference at d0 while keeping the BBO/Glan-Thompson SPDC beamsplitter positioned after the double-slit? Maybe some other type of idler beam meshing apparatus (lens, mirrors, prisms...) is needed to erase the which-path info completely?

Or maybe some marking or filtering apparatus that does not add which-way path information be added to the post-entangled signal beam so that the double signal beams, which are red and blue colored in the diagram, could form a visible interference pattern at d0?
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
rodd said:
Now let's suppose you completely remove all idler detectors d1 to d4 from the experiment but leave the SPDC apparatus with its entangled beams and having the idler beam undetected (ie. pointing the idler beams to space), will the observer ever experience an interference pattern at d0?
No.

rodd said:
Did spontaneous parametric down-conversion at the BBO crystal destroy the self-interference superposition of the signal beam?
Yes.

rodd said:
But, if yes, then where do the interference patterns in the "post-processed" detections come from exactly?
From the correlations of the two entangled photons in the final two-photon state.

rodd said:
As I understand the original double-slit superposition has not been destroyed and an interference pattern should be visible somehow.
The original single photon does not longer exist after the down-conversion, and obviously you cannot see the interference pattern of something that doesn't longer exist.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K