What does it mean to be momentum entangled?

San K
Messages
905
Reaction score
1
what does it mean to be momentum entangled? and how can it improve resolution?

what does it mean to be momentum entangled? - say for photons
and
how can it improve the resolution of an optical microscope?

Understanding polarization entanglement is easier/familiar - i.e. - the twins have opposite spins.

in momentum entanglement how is the phase and/or wave-length divided/distributed?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
When photons come out of a PDC crystal, they are entangled as to frequency and wavelength. This is an analog (more or less) to momentum since their velocity is fixed as c.

The entanglement is such that frequency(Alice) + frequency(Bob) = fixed amount. Wavelength is essentially the reciprocal of the frequency (times a constant).

If you know Alice's frequency, you can deduce Bob's. And vice versa. So they are entangled. This may seem obvious, but remember that position commutes with this observable. Once you know Alice's frequency, you make Bob's position indeterminate.
 
Great response DrChinese. You covered all the questions well.
DrChinese said:
The entanglement is such that frequency(Alice) + frequency(Bob) = fixed amount.

frequency(Alice) + frequency(Bob) = fixed amount = frequency(photon that struck the PDC) - frequency(that is lost due to conversion/interaction?)

also is frequency (Alice or Bob) indeterminate till measured?

this could give the illusion that -- frequency is being transferred/distributed/balanced between Alice and Bob at the time of measurement/decoherence

DrChinese said:
Once you know Alice's frequency, you make Bob's position indeterminate.

this strengthens the QE hypothesis (and makes the LHV hypothesis weaker) I guess.

on a separate note: is frequency quantized?

so if struck the PDC with a photon having 1 quanta of frequency, we could never have two photons emerging out of the PDC even after trillions of strikes by such photons?
 
Last edited:
DrChinese said:
If you know Alice's frequency, you can deduce Bob's. And vice versa. So they are entangled. This may seem obvious, but remember that position commutes with this observable. Once you know Alice's frequency, you make Bob's position indeterminate.

I suspect you meant doesn't commute.
 
Nabeshin said:
I suspect you meant doesn't commute.

Ah yes, thanks for that. I misspoke myself. :smile:

They are conjugates so they DON'T commute.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...
Back
Top