Will a Photon Inside a Perfectly Reflecting Box Eventually be Detected?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Dmitry67
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Collapse
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of detecting a photon trapped inside a perfectly reflecting box, focusing on theoretical aspects of quantum mechanics, gravitational effects, and the nature of information. Participants explore concepts such as superposition, gravitational detection, and the potential for indirect measurements without directly observing the photon.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that a photon inside a perfectly reflecting box could be in a superposition state, leading to potential indirect detection through gravitational effects.
  • Another participant counters that conservation of information and principles like no-cloning might prevent the scenario from being feasible.
  • A different viewpoint proposes that the time it takes to detect the photon gravitationally could be analogous to the time a black hole takes to dissipate, although this is contested.
  • Some participants argue that the radius of the box is more critical than its mass in determining detection thresholds.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of decoherence and how it relates to the ability to maintain superposition states in the presence of gravitational interactions.
  • There is a discussion about whether indirect measurements via gravity are fundamentally different from other forms of photon detection.
  • One participant questions the relevance of Hawking radiation in this context, suggesting that the box could be cooled to absolute zero, while others argue that some form of radiation may still be present due to gravitational effects.
  • Several participants express uncertainty about the relationship between gravitational fields and quantum mechanics, particularly regarding the need to quantize gravity.
  • There is a debate about whether gravity uniquely influences the detection of quantum states compared to other forces like electromagnetism.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a variety of competing views on the implications of gravitational detection of photons and the nature of superposition. No consensus is reached, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the specifics of detection thresholds and the role of gravity in quantum mechanics.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in their arguments, such as assumptions about the rigidity of the box, the nature of gravitational interactions, and the effects of decoherence. The discussion also touches on unresolved mathematical steps related to the detection of photons and the implications of quantum mechanics.

Dmitry67
Messages
2,564
Reaction score
1
I have a sphere or a box with ideally reflecting sufraces (inside). I open a cover, catch 1 photon, and close a cover. Photon is infinitely reflected back and forth inside. I can open a cover later and analyze it.

Now say I can a 'superposition' with 50% of the chance that I have a photon and 50% that I don't have it. Even photon is bounced inside in reversible manner, I see 2 problems:

1. Photon inside increase the energy stress tensor, so very sensitive device can detect extra gravitational attraction from the box, revealing 'which path' information.

2. When photon is inside the box, the box is under additional stress. As there are no absolutely rigid bodies, box becomes slightly larger. Also, it information is not elastic, then the box becomes hotter, so it is detectable from the outside.

So, even mirrors are ideal, still ofter some time we will be able to find out if photon is inside. What is a threshold?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Nice one. But I don't think you will be able to get away with it. I'll put my money on the conservation of information, no-cloning principle, etc. Conceptually it feels somewhat similar to the Hawking radiation, so I would think you'll be able to find the corresponding temperature for that box using the similar principles.
 
Last edited:
And my guess, that the threshold time would be the same, as the time that the black hole (with the same mass as the box, not the photon) takes to dissipate.

Of course I might be very wrong, or not even wrong.
 
Nah. The mass of the box is not important, it's the radius that makes the difference.
 
Yes, this is what I wanted to say.
 
The obvious example of such a box is an atom.
 
Dmitry, I don't even understand what is the problem we are supposed to discuss in this thread.

Perhaps you are saying that the problem is that we can determine that the box catched the photon without actually detecting the photon? That's true, we can do it, but I don't see any problem with it.
 
My question is if we did it, how long it would take for us to detect gravitationally if photon is inside or not - without opening a box?
 
Why is this any different from e.g experiments where the number of photons at one frequency in a cavity is "counted" by measuring photons at another frequency (using strong non-linear coupling)?
Both are just examples of "indirect" detection of photons, it is nothing new.
Detecting it via gravity just seems like an very complicated way of doing it...
 
  • #10
You're absolutely right
But

1. It is not important if we can create such measurement device. Because decoherence is lost even if measurement device is not functioning or if the photon hit the wall we don't know where and is lost. It is importnat that in principle what-path information is dissipated somehow in the environment.

2. The difference is that you can decide to perform such indirect measurements or not. But gravity ALWAYS works and there is no way to stop it. So it can create some kind of 'upper limit' of how low we can preserve and keep the state in superposition no matter how careful are we.
 
  • #11
Dmitry67 said:
My question is if we did it, how long it would take for us to detect gravitationally if photon is inside or not - without opening a box?

So you were asking about the minimum threshold... My point was that your box would radiate, so in some time no photons would be left there for you to detect.

IMHO it does not matter how you confine energy in some volume. It can be gravity, mirrors or whatever. At the minimum you will have Hawking radiation.
 
  • #12
Radiate? Why? Why hawking radiation?

Say box is cooled to T=0.
 
  • #13
Dmitry67 said:
My question is if we did it, how long it would take for us to detect gravitationally if photon is inside or not - without opening a box?
And why do you find this question interesting? I know that you are mostly interested in deep fundamental questions on QM (just as I am), so my problem is to figure out how answering this particular question would make your understanding of QM deeper.
 
  • #14
If the box is sufficiently small, say on the order of microns, said photon may tunnel through the box.
 
  • #15
Demystifier said:
And why do you find this question interesting? I know that you are mostly interested in deep fundamental questions on QM (just as I am), so my problem is to figure out how answering this particular question would make your understanding of QM deeper.

Why do you think Penrose suggested objective collapse based on the gravity (long time ago)?
Gravity is special
 
  • #16
As soon as you measure the gravitational field of the box, you become entangled with the photon.
 
  • #17
Don't all objects around the box constantly measure gravitational attraction to the box?
 
  • #18
They do, and they do that by exchanging quanta of gravitational field.

What we have here basically is an argument that explains why we _really_ need to quantize gravity, and we can't just, say, equate the classical Einstein tensor to the expectation value of the stress-energy tensor.

http://fds.oup.com/www.oup.com/pdf/13/9780199212521.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #19
Dmitry67 said:
Don't all objects around the box constantly measure gravitational attraction to the box?

You are talking about some kind of gravity induced decoherence, right?
 
  • #21
Here are couple of links, which I think also relevant.
http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/1742-6596/171/1/012007/jpconf9_171_012007.pdf
http://pirsa.org/07110037/

And IMHO that box will have a temperature (and radiation) similar to the Hawking radiation of the black hole with the same surface area. If this is indeed the case, Dmitry67 - you won't be able to cool it to T = 0.

But I might easily be wrong. Please correct me, if you have some good reasons why this might be wrong.
 
  • #22
I don't understand why Hawking radiation will be emitted by an ordinary object, not a BH
 
  • #23
Dmitry67 said:
I don't understand why Hawking radiation will be emitted by an ordinary object, not a BH

I was not saying that there is going to be Hawking radiation, only that something similar to it may show up. I thought that there was some similarity between your ideally reflecting box and the black hole. Please excuse me for bugging you with very naive and uneducated guesses.

BTW: To hamster143 - thanks for the explanations and links. To Dmitry67 - thanks for a very nice question.
 
  • #24
Radiation from a black hole is generated by the horizon. I don't see how cold body (absolutely black or reflecting - it is irrelevant) can generate any radiation.
 
  • #25
Dmitry67 said:
Why do you think Penrose suggested objective collapse based on the gravity (long time ago)?
Gravity is special
Now I understand your motivation, thanks!
Anyway, I don't think that gravity is so special and I don't buy this Penrose suggestion at all.
 
  • #26
Gravity is special that you can decide if you want to detect or not to detect. But gravity ALWAYS works, it always slowly tries to 'measure' everything.
 
  • #27
Dmitry67 said:
Radiation from a black hole is generated by the horizon. I don't see how cold body (absolutely black or reflecting - it is irrelevant) can generate any radiation.
The same mechanism which is responsible for Hawking radiation (created by a COLLAPSING black hole) is also responsible for radiation from ANY time-dependent gravitational field. The horizon is responsible for the thermal spectrum of the radiation, but not for the creation of radiation itself.
 
  • #28
Dmitry67 said:
Gravity is special that you can decide if you want to detect or not to detect.
I don't get it. Why, e.g., electromagnetism does not have this property?
 
  • #29
Demystifier said:
I don't get it. Why, e.g., electromagnetism does not have this property?

Electric charges can be cancelled. We can pass electrons thru neutral material (sonsisting of e- and p+). As there is no interaction (or it is cancelled) then there is no decoherence

gravity is like having all matter positively charged and conducting experiments on the electrons.
 
  • #30
Demystifier said:
The same mechanism which is responsible for Hawking radiation (created by a COLLAPSING black hole) is also responsible for radiation from ANY time-dependent gravitational field. The horizon is responsible for the thermal spectrum of the radiation, but not for the creation of radiation itself.

Ah, I see.
Is gravitational field from the photon is contantly changing (because it is moving, bouncing back and forth) or constant (because it forms a static wavefunction in cavity)?
 

Similar threads

Graduate Why Do Photons Disappear in a Perfectly Sealed Box?
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Graduate Avalanche photon detectors
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
857
High School Does Schrödinger's Cat Know Its Own Fate?
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Misc. Isolation box to measure light source inside (closer to visible light)
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
Undergrad Human eyes can detect single photons?
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
Graduate Mass of Box A vs Box B with Photon Inside
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Undergrad Graduation of air flow inside a vacuum chamber
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Graduate Photon entanglement and fair sampling assumption
  • · Replies 99 ·
4
Replies
99
Views
17K
Graduate Homemade Quantum Eraser Experiment revisited with photos and full text
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
8K
Undergrad What happens to heat and radiation in a perfectly insulated box?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K