background preloader

Elitzur–Vaidman bomb tester

Elitzur–Vaidman bomb tester
Bomb-testing problem diagram. A - photon emitter, B - bomb to be tested, C,D - photon detectors. Mirrors in the lower left and upper right corners are half-silvered. In physics, the Elitzur–Vaidman bomb-testing problem is a thought experiment in quantum mechanics, first proposed by Avshalom Elitzur and Lev Vaidman in 1993.[1] An actual experiment demonstrating the solution was constructed and successfully tested by Anton Zeilinger, Paul Kwiat, Harald Weinfurter, and Thomas Herzog from the University of Innsbruck, Austria and Mark A. Kasevich of Stanford University in 1994.[2] It employs a Mach–Zehnder interferometer for ascertaining whether a measurement has taken place. Problem[edit] Consider a collection of bombs, of which some are duds. Solution[edit] Start with a Mach–Zehnder interferometer and a light source which emits single photons. Step-by-step explanation[edit] If the bomb is a dud: The bomb will pass the wave, so the situation is as described above, without a bomb. See also[edit]

Slashbot: The Guitar Hero Robot | A Texas A&M Electrical Engineering Project Quantum eraser experiment The double-slit quantum eraser experiment described in this article has three stages:[1] First, the experimenter reproduces the interference pattern of Young's double-slit experiment by shining photons at the double-slit interferometer and checking for an interference pattern at the detection screen.Next, the experimenter marks through which slit each photon went, without disturbing its wavefunction, and demonstrates that thereafter the interference pattern is destroyed. This stage indicates that it is the existence of the "which-path" information that causes the destruction of the interference pattern.Third, the "which-path" information is "erased," whereupon the interference pattern is recovered. (Rather than removing or reversing any changes introduced into the photon or its path, these experiments typically produce another change that obscures the markings earlier produced.) Quantum erasure technology can be used to increase the resolution of advanced microscope.[3] Introduction[edit]

Reconstruct your world with ReconstructMe Delayed choice quantum eraser A delayed choice quantum eraser, first performed by Yoon-Ho Kim, R. Yu, S.P. Kulik, Y.H. Shih and Marlan O. Scully,[1] and reported in early 1999, is an elaboration on the quantum eraser experiment that incorporates concepts considered in Wheeler's delayed choice experiment. The delayed choice quantum eraser experiment investigates a paradox. Delayed choice experiments have uniformly confirmed the seeming ability of measurements made on photons in the present to alter events occurring in the past. Introduction[edit] In the basic double slit experiment, a beam of light (usually from a laser) is directed perpendicularly towards a wall pierced by two parallel slit apertures. Which-path information and the visibility of interference fringes are hence complementary quantities. A simple quantum eraser experiment[edit] Figure 1. In the two diagrams in Fig. 1, photons are emitted one at a time from a laser symbolized by a yellow star. Delayed choice[edit] The experiment of Kim et al. (2000)[edit]

AOC Europe - TFT LCD Monitors and TV : Home Wheeler's delayed choice experiment Wheeler's delayed choice experiment is actually several thought experiments in quantum physics, proposed by John Archibald Wheeler, with the most prominent among them appearing in 1978 and 1984.[1] These experiments are attempts to decide whether light somehow "senses" the experimental apparatus in the double-slit experiment it will travel through and adjusts its behavior to fit by assuming the appropriate determinate state for it, or whether light remains in an indeterminate state, neither wave nor particle, and responds to the "questions" asked of it by responding in either a wave-consistent manner or a particle-consistent manner depending on the experimental arrangements that ask these "questions."[2] This line of experimentation proved very difficult to carry out when it was first conceived. Nevertheless, it has proven very valuable over the years since it has led researchers to provide "increasingly sophisticated demonstrations of the wave–particle duality of single quanta.

Schrödinger's cat Schrödinger's cat: a cat, a flask of poison, and a radioactive source are placed in a sealed box. If an internal monitor detects radioactivity (i.e. a single atom decaying), the flask is shattered, releasing the poison that kills the cat. The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics implies that after a while, the cat is simultaneously alive and dead. Yet, when one looks in the box, one sees the cat either alive or dead, not both alive and dead. This poses the question of when exactly quantum superposition ends and reality collapses into one possibility or the other. Schrödinger's cat is a thought experiment, sometimes described as a paradox, devised by Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger in 1935.[1] It illustrates what he saw as the problem of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics applied to everyday objects. Origin and motivation[edit] Real-size cat figure in the garden of Huttenstrasse 9, Zurich, where Erwin Schrödinger lived 1921 – 1926. Schrödinger wrote:[1][10]

Popper's experiment Popper's experiment is an experiment proposed by the philosopher Karl Popper. As early as 1934 he was suspicious of, and was proposing experiments to test, the Copenhagen interpretation, a popular subjectivist interpretation of quantum mechanics.[1][2] Popper's experiment is a realization of an argument similar in spirit to the thought experiment of Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen (the EPR paradox) although not as well known. There are various interpretations of quantum mechanics that do not agree with each other. Despite their differences, they are experimentally nearly indistinguishable from each other. Popper's proposed experiment[edit] Popper wrote: I wish to suggest a crucial experiment to test whether knowledge alone is sufficient to create 'uncertainty' and, with it, scatter (as is contended under the Copenhagen interpretation), or whether it is the physical situation that is responsible for the scatter.[9] There are two slits, one each in the paths of the two particles. . . where . .

Related: