SciAm's DIY Quantum Eraser: Not Real?

In summary: Huygen's principle is not quite right for light, but the difference between that and the correct boundary conditions is small for the geometries of most interest. So the classical theory of optics does carry over to the quantum theory of the electromagnetic field.In summary, the DIY Quantum Eraser experiment described in the May 2007 issue of Scientific American successfully demonstrated the "quantum eraser" effect, where a 45-degree polarization can erase the "markers" that determine which slit a photon went through in a double-slit experiment. This was confirmed by the discovery of the Fresnel-Arago laws which state that light polarized at right angles does not interfere. While classical theory of the electromagnetic field can be used to explain
  • #1
Karl Coryat
104
3
I recently tried a "DIY Quantum Eraser" experiment that was in the May 2007 issue of Scientific American (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=slide-show-do-it-yourself-diy-quantum-eraser"). The basic idea is it's a double-slit experiment where photons going through each slit are "marked" by linear-polarizing the light at a right angle relative to the other slit, then "erasing" the marking by introducing a 45-degree polarization. It worked well, but I had trouble believing that I was witnessing a true "quantum eraser" effect. It struck me that two light waves, linear-polarized at right angles to each other, perhaps would not interfere regardless of the circumstances.

A little digging online and I found the http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Fresnel-Arago+laws" , which state that light polarized at right angles does not interfere.

I looked all over for someone pointing out SciAm's error, but found nothing. A few people have written about performing the experiment, but none protested that the observed results aren't what they are purported to be.

Am I right in assuming that Scientific American got it wrong -- that this experiment confirms not quantum erasure, but the Fresnel-Arago laws? Or, is it that the Fresnel-Arago laws predate quantum mechanics, and quantum erasure actually explains why two orthogonally polarized beams will not interfere?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The way I see it (and take my opinion with a grain of salt because I'm just learning about the quantum eraser now and my background on quantum mechanics is pretty lacking), two waves purely polarized at right angles to each other don't interfere because the polarization itself gives the observer the information required to deduce which "slit" the photon went through. This information thus collapses the interference pattern.

In other words I agree with your second option: that the quantum eraser experiment explains why right angle polarized rays don't interfere.

Btw, I'm really glad I found this thread. I'm doing a short presentation on the quantum eraser in class soon, and it'd be great if I can get this little home made experiment to work.
 
  • #3
You are correct! With only the x- and y-linear polarizers in place, there is no interference. But, if you then repeat the experiment with the 45 degree polarizer added, there is interference. Actually, you should do three experiments to "see" the "eraser" effect.
1 - Do the experiment without any polarizers. There is interference.
2 - Do the experiment with x-polarizer covering slit A and y-polarizer covering slit B. There is no interference.
3 - Do the experiment with all three polarizers in place. Again, there is interference, as in the first experiment. It is as if the 45 degree polarizer has "erased" the "markers" that told us which slit the photon went through.
Best wishes
 
  • #4
I just read the Scientific American article and it is correct as written. However, it is true that long before quantum mechanics it was known that only parallel components of E can interfere.
Best wishes
 
  • #5
Karl Coryat said:
I recently tried a "DIY Quantum Eraser" experiment that was in the May 2007 issue of Scientific American (explained and illustrated here). The basic idea is it's a double-slit experiment where photons going through each slit are "marked" by linear-polarizing the light at a right angle relative to the other slit, then "erasing" the marking by introducing a 45-degree polarization. It worked well, but I had trouble believing that I was witnessing a true "quantum eraser" effect. It struck me that two light waves, linear-polarized at right angles to each other, perhaps would not interfere regardless of the circumstances.

A little digging online and I found the Fresnel-Arago laws, which state that light polarized at right angles does not interfere.

I looked all over for someone pointing out SciAm's error, but found nothing. A few people have written about performing the experiment, but none protested that the observed results aren't what they are purported to be.

Am I right in assuming that Scientific American got it wrong -- that this experiment confirms not quantum erasure, but the Fresnel-Arago laws? Or, is it that the Fresnel-Arago laws predate quantum mechanics, and quantum erasure actually explains why two orthogonally polarized beams will not interfere?

-------------------------
You are correct. You can use classical theory of the electromagnetic field, except for coincidence counting rates. But not at all, at low photon number in the field. Weak fields do not indicate low photon number; they can be overlapping very long photon wave-packets in weak fields, and it is a lot easier to just think in terms of the field.
(John Archibald Wheeler comments that one can use classical field (with minor adjustment to the energy in some cases), in his delayed choice article [J. A. Wheeler, In Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, edited by A.R. Marlow (Academic Press, NY, 1978). pp. 9-48.])
There are many stories about behavior of photons that miss-the-mark.
Further, the superposition principle in quantum theory is mathematically the same as Huygen's in classical optics, in terms of adding wave sources.
 

Related to SciAm's DIY Quantum Eraser: Not Real?

1. Is the DIY Quantum Eraser from SciAm really not real?

Yes, the DIY Quantum Eraser from SciAm is not a real device. It is a thought experiment used to explain the principles of quantum mechanics.

2. What is the purpose of the DIY Quantum Eraser from SciAm?

The purpose of the DIY Quantum Eraser from SciAm is to help people understand the counterintuitive concepts of quantum mechanics, such as the wave-particle duality and the collapse of the wave function.

3. Can I build and use the DIY Quantum Eraser from SciAm to conduct experiments?

No, the DIY Quantum Eraser from SciAm is not a real device and cannot be built or used to conduct experiments. It is purely a theoretical concept.

4. Are there any real-life applications of the DIY Quantum Eraser from SciAm?

No, the DIY Quantum Eraser from SciAm has no practical applications. It is simply a tool used for educational and conceptual purposes.

5. Can the DIY Quantum Eraser from SciAm be used to prove or disprove the existence of parallel universes?

No, the DIY Quantum Eraser from SciAm is not a real device and cannot be used to prove or disprove anything. It is a simplified thought experiment used to explain a specific aspect of quantum mechanics.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
173
Replies
20
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
729
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
19
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
980
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
2
Replies
52
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • DIY Projects
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top