Two-Photon Experiment: Correlation, Factorization, and Polarization

  • Thread starter Thread starter phonon44145
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Experiment
phonon44145
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
Recently I came across the following two-photon state

sqrt(2) |2v,0h> + |1v,1h>

(as a side note, it results when a single, vertically polarized photon |1v> interacts with an excited atom and interaction is modeled by the Jaynes-Cummings hamiltonian - the first term is stimulated, the second - spontaneous emission). Of course, there should be normalization constant 1/sqrt 3 which I dropped to keep things simple.

So the number of photons is fixed (2 photons), but they can be both polarized vertically or that can be in orthogonal polarization modes. If one photon now passes through a horizontal polarizing filter and lands on the screen behind it, we know that photon was polarized horizontally. So the other one must certainly be polarized vertically and we can predict it is going to be absorbed in the filter. On the other hand, if we register an absorption event first, then we still can't tell if the other photon will be absorbed or transmitted.

My question:

1. What is the correlation among the two photons in the above state - are they mutually independent, are they (weakly) entangled, or neither?
2. Is it possible to factor out the vertical photon in the above expression to write the state as the product

|1v> (a|1v> + b|1h>)

and if not, why?
3. We now want to measure the polarization of each photon, and pass the given 2-photon state through a vertical polarizer. What are the probabilities of each outcome: a) |1v>|1v>, b) |1h>|1h>, c) |1v>|1h> ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
4. The same question if polarizations are measured in the circular basis. What are the probabilities of a) |1R>|1R>, b) |1L>|1L>, c) |1R>|1L>?
 
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