The Mysteries of Quantum Entanglement with Delayed Choice Question

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter cartmanbrah
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Choice Delayed choice
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the implications of the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment, specifically referencing the work of Kim et al. Participants explore the concept of placing a measuring device one light year away from the entangled photon interaction point and its potential to influence past observations of interference patterns. It is established that the interference pattern is not directly observed until results from both signal and idler photons are combined using a coincidence counter, negating the possibility of altering past outcomes based on measurement decisions made at a distance.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly quantum entanglement.
  • Familiarity with the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment and its setup.
  • Knowledge of interference patterns and their significance in quantum experiments.
  • Experience with coincidence counting in quantum optics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the specifics of the Kim et al. delayed choice quantum eraser experiment.
  • Explore the concept of coincidence counters in quantum optics.
  • Investigate the implications of measurement in quantum mechanics and its effect on entangled states.
  • Examine alternative experimental setups that could modify the detection of interference patterns.
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, researchers in quantum mechanics, and students studying advanced quantum optics will benefit from this discussion, particularly those interested in the nuances of quantum entanglement and measurement theory.

cartmanbrah
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
When you have the delayed choice quantum eraser, and you make it really really big and you put a measuring device just before the prism where the entangled photon will hit (Kim et al experiment). Does that mean that when that measuring device is 1 light year away and the people operating it can change whether or not it is turned on or of. They can decide the past? By turning the device on (and keep it on) they know that a year earlier people did not see an interference pattern?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
cartmanbrah said:
When you have the delayed choice quantum eraser, and you make it really really big and you put a measuring device just before the prism where the entangled photon will hit (Kim et al experiment). Does that mean that when that measuring device is 1 light year away and the people operating it can change whether or not it is turned on or of. They can decide the past? By turning the device on (and keep it on) they know that a year earlier people did not see an interference pattern?

The interference pattern is not directly observed in Kim's experiment; it only becomes apparent when the results from both signal and idler photon are combined by the coincidence counter. (The wikipedia description of this experiment and its significance is pretty good). Thus, there is no possibility of seeing or not seeing an interference pattern before the results from all the detectors are available.

I don't understand exactly where in the experimental setup you're proposing to put the measuring device that you mention above?
 
Nugatory said:
The interference pattern is not directly observed in Kim's experiment; it only becomes apparent when the results from both signal and idler photon are combined by the coincidence counter. (The wikipedia description of this experiment and its significance is pretty good). Thus, there is no possibility of seeing or not seeing an interference pattern before the results from all the detectors are available.

I don't understand exactly where in the experimental setup you're proposing to put the measuring device that you mention above?
thanks for the answer, after reading some more i understand what you say but i don't understand why the 2 detectors that have no which path information create interference paterns which are out of fase?
isn't it possible to combine these 2 detectors in one detector somehow with a new setup?
what I'm basically aiming at is what if you take kim's expirement but you place 2 detectors at the end of the path of the idler photons, you can either measure them or not (and know where it came from). if you measure them you record the data and if you don't measure them you destroy the data somehow (maybe a prism that directs them to the same detector, it doesn't even have to be turned on). to cause no confusion: in this setup you use kim's setup but without al the d1,d2,d3,d4 detector stuff. Dont you get different results then?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K