But!

- Group Task
If light is just a bunch of particles, how should it travel through a slit?
 But!
• You should see a single bright spot on the screen
 Experimental Observations - Group Task
But what actually happens?
 Diffraction
We don’t observe a ‘bright spot’
 Diffraction in the real world
We see this easier with other waves
 Double Slit - Group Task
If light is just particles, how should it travel through a double slit?
 Particle (only) model
• Perhaps it should just go through one slit or the other
• And give a bright spot

•
 Particle (only) model
• Like this: or this:
 Particle (only) model
• Or perhaps two bright spots
 Experimental Observations - Group Task
• But what does it actually do?

•
 Diffraction
• Constructive/Destructive Interference
 Diffraction of Light
• Both observations support the wave model of light
 Diffraction of Light
• An example with a laser (up to 2:00)
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzbKb59my3U
 Light
• Light has characteristics of waves and particles
• Wave-particle duality
 Light
• These packets of photons produce a wave-like pattern
• Wave-particle duality
 Firing One Photon at a time….
• But what happens if you fire one photon at a time?
 Even Weirder
• Apparently, a particle-like buildup
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzbKb59my3U (2:00+)
 Wave-Particle Duality
• So light really does have properties of both!
 A Question
• If photons can act like regular particles. Can particles act like waves?
• E.g electrons, protons etc.
 Let’s See…
With some thinking experiments
 Let’s See… - Group Task
What would happen if we did the slit experiment with particles?
 Grains of Sand
Same experiment,
but tilted 90o

What happens?
 Particles – Double-Slit Experiment
The particles go through one slit or the other
 Particles – Double-Slit Experiment
Particles acting like particles! (No interference pattern)
 Thinking Exercise Two – Group Task
What if we fired electrons?

Let’s block off one slit

 Observational Results
Nothing strange. A clump-like pattern
 Thinking Exercise Two – Group Task
But there is a bit of spreading. Speculate why
 Perhaps
• Some electrons go clean through
• Some bounce off the edge?
• Some bounce off each other
 Quantum Physics – Group Task
• What if we open the second slit?
• (Davisson–Germer experiment , 1927)

• Speculate what happens

 Quantum Physics – Group Task
• Perhaps a clump-like pattern
 Observational Results – Group Task
• But what actually happens?
 Quantum Physics
• A huge mystery in Quantum Physics…
 Observational Results
• We see an interference pattern! Not two clumps!
• Similar to light
 Observational Results
• It’s as if the electrons have gone through like waves
 Speculate – Group Task
• How could this happen? Speculate with particle theory
 Perhaps
• Interactions between electrons?
• Bouncing off each other?
 Speculate – Group Task
• What if we send the electrons through one at a time?

(So they can’t interact)

 Initial Observations
• Looks fine. Like they’re just randomly arriving in clumps
 Observations over time
• But eventually they form the interference pattern again!
 Disproof
• So the electrons are not bouncing off each other to form it
 Speculation
• Each electron is playing a role in forming the interference
pattern
 Remember
• But each electron arrives on the screen as a localized point

• A flash of light is read on the screen

 The Next Step - Question
• How could we check further?
 The Next Step - Question
• We can spy on the electron and see which slit it goes through
 Detector
• Just above the upper slit,
• flashes every time it sees an electron
 Detector
• 50% of the time, it beeps
• 50% of the time, it doesn’t
 To Clarify
• 50% of the time – pass through upper slit
• 50% of the time – passes through lower slit
 Experimental Observations – With Detector
• What happens?
 Experimental Observations – With Detector
• AHHHHHHH!!!!
 Experimental Observations – With Detector
• It’s changed. You get the clump-like pattern when you detect it
 Experimental Observations – With Detector
• 50% of the time – Beeps. spot arrives in line with upper slit
• 50% of the time – No Beep. Spot arrives in line with lower slit
 Experimental Observations – Without Detector
• Without the detector, we have an interference pattern!
 Experimental Observations
• You get a different result – with and without the detector
Without With
 Experimental Observations – Group Task
• Let’s try again
• Keep the detector there
• But turn it off

• What will happen?

 Experimental Observations
• Surely the clump-like result!
 Experimental Observations
AHHHHHHHH!!!! It goes back to before!
 Experimental Observations
Wave-Particle duality of particles
 Move the Detector -To Note
• This happens even when the detector is:
• Placed after the slit
• Switched on at the last second
 Can You Explain it
If you can, you’ll win a Nobel prize
 Can You Explain it
But we’re going to try….
 Occam’s Razor
• How would Occam’s Razor explain it?
 Occam’s Razor Explanation
• The detector interferes with the result?

• Remember: we can’t see electrons

 Analogy
• The room is completely dark
• I fire a tennis ball into the room
• You must determine the location, using only a racket

• What happens?
 Analogy
• By measuring, you’ve changed the state of the ball
• This has destroyed the path information you had
• there is no way you can examine without changing the system fundamentally.
 The Detector
• This applies to the detector
 The Detector
• If we try to detect which slit it traverses, we actively destroy the
interference pattern
 The Detector
• Maybe We force it to ‘pick a slit’?
 The Detector
• Makes sense. So let’s move it to a point after the slit….
 The Detector
• New trial. Detector is placed at a point after the slit

Should be fine, right?

 AHHHHHH!
• The same thing happens!
In Front of Slit Behind Slit
 AHHHHHH, Continued…
• And it reverts back to the interference pattern when switched off!
In Front of Slit Behind Slit
 AHHHHHH, Continued…
• And it gets worse….
 The Detector
• Even if its turned on at the very final second….
 The Detector
• It’s as though they went back in time and loaded the information
• And choose the slit retrospectively
 Explanations
• We don’t really know what happens, but there are theories…
 Firstly, Let’s Define Our Experiments
• Detector placed before slit – Which path experiment
• Detector placed just before the screen – Delayed choice experiment
 Secondly, Let’s Discuss Results More
• Electrons are discrete units of well-defined mass and charge
• But here they act like waves
 Enter De Broglie…
• This supported his 1924 theory
• “Since light can exhibit particle-like behavior, perhaps a particle (like
an electron), can exhibit wavelike behavior”

• De Broglie Wavelength:

•
 Enter De Broglie…
• This experimental result can be produced for electrons, atoms and
even Buckminster Fullerine (C60)
•
 Enter De Broglie…
• But for particles beyond that size, we won’t see this effect
Let’s Have a Checkpoint…
 Review/Exam Question - Describe
Describe what happens in the double-slit experiment : for
light/particles, and suggest which theory it supports (8 marks)
 Example Answer - Describe
Light will produce a wave-like interference pattern (1) Though when photons are passed through one at a time,
they will build up over time in a particle-like process (1) This demonstrates wave-particle duality (1) Electrons
passing through, will produce a wave-like interference pattern (1) Unless we try to detect them (1) in which
case, they seemingly produce a particle-like clump pattern (1) This happens for a which path experiment (1) and
a delayed choice experiment (1) This gives support for De Broglie’s theory (1) that particles can exhibit wave-like
properties (1) We know the electrons aren’t producing this by knocking into each other (1) because we fire
them one at a time (1) Each electron has a role in forming the pattern (1)
Round Two….
 Back to the Theories…
• Each electron dumps at a single point
•The interference pattern builds up over time
•
 Now back to the Theories…
• Even when the electrons are fired one at a time
• So they don’t ‘knock’ into each other to produce this pattern
 Now back to the Theories…
• The electron has an individual role in this buildup of a pattern
 First Conclusion
What can we conclude about the electrons in this experiment?
 Wave-Particle Duality
• The single electron/atom or photon travels through both slits, as
some sort of wave
 Wave-Particle Duality
• But since we’ve sent the electrons/photons through one at a time…
• That wave interacts with itself, to produce an interference pattern
 Wave-Particle Duality
• These peaks are regions where there’s more chance the particle will hit
 Wave-Particle Duality
• It’s a wave of possible undefined positions
 Wave-Particle Duality
• Until it resolves itself into a single certain position
• (hits the screen at a point)
 Particle Behaviour
• We know where the particle is:
• At the electron gun
• At the screen (releases it’s energy at a point)
 Particle Behaviour
• At each end – particle-like
• In between – wave-like
 Wave Behaviour
• The wave: Holds information about all possible final positions of the particle
• And at each stage before it hits the screen screen
 Wave Behaviour
• The wave maps out all possible paths the particle could take
• It’s a space of possibility
 Wave Behaviour
• But at the screen, it ‘chooses’ a position
 Wave Behaviour - Question
• Why is this?
 Wave Behaviour - Question
•We don’t know, but there are interpretations….
 Copenhagen Interpretation (1927) – Part One
“The wave function doesn’t have a physical nature. It’s comprised of pure
possibility. The particle in the double slit experiment exists only as a wave
of possible locations that encompasses all possible paths”

Werner Heisenburg Niels Bohr

 Copenhagen Interpretation (1927) – Part Two
“It’s only when the particle is detected, that:

• A location, and
• The path it took to get there, is decided”

Werner Heisenburg Niels Bohr

 Copenhagen Interpretation (1927) – Part Three
“There is a transition from a space of possibility, to a defined set of
properties”

The collapse of the wave function

Werner Heisenburg Niels Bohr

 Copenhagen Interpretation (1927) – Part Four
Prior to the collapse, it’s meaningless to try and define a particl’es
properties
 Copenhagen Interpretation (1927) – Part Five
All possibilities exist, until the last instant (when it hits the screen
- detection)
 Copenhagen Interpretation (1927) – Part Six
•It is the different possible paths, that interact with each other
•Some paths have a higher chance of occurring in reality than others
 Copenhagen Interpretation (1927) – Question
• Can you put this into one sentence?

Werner Heisenburg Niels Bohr

 Copenhagen Interpretation - Summary
• In the middle space: It’s a probability wave (that does wave-like
stuff), until something happens to collapse it
 Collapse of Wave Function
• What causes that transition?
 The Observer Effect
• Measurement?

• Remember?
AHHHHHH!

In Front of Slit Behind Slit

 AHHHHHH, Continued…
• And the same results when switched off!
In Front of Slit Behind Slit
 The Observer Effect
• Perhaps the very act of measurement, is what collapses the wave
function
• The Observer Effect
 The Observer Effect
•The detector destroys the wave-like interference pattern
• (Even if placed just before the screen)
 The Observer Effect
• This is the observer effect. We’ve interfered
 The Observer Effect - Simplified
• This causes the fuzzy wavey-thing to collapse into a point
 A Nicer Analogy
• There’s a much nicer way of summarizing this….
 Schrödinger's Cat
A brilliant thought experiment from 1935
 Schrödinger's Cat
A cat is placed in a sealed box, with a device that has a 50%
chance of killing it in the next hour
 Schrödinger's Cat
You cannot see into the sealed box
 Schrödinger's Cat
You wait one hour…
 Schrödinger's Cat
Is it alive or dead?
 Schrödinger's Cat
Is it alive or dead?
 Schrödinger's Cat
We don’t know, until we open the box
 Schrödinger's Cat
Before we open it, it’s equal parts alive and dead
 Schrödinger's Cat
Before we open it, it’s equal parts alive and dead
 Schrödinger's Cat
Only when we open it, do we see a single definite state
 Schrödinger's Cat
Before that, it’s a blur of possibility
 Schrödinger's Cat – Observer Effect
Observing the cat, forces it to choose a defined state
 Schrödinger's Cat – Observer Effect
This collapses the ‘cloud of possibility’
 Double Slit Experiment
Much like the electorns in the experiment
 Schrödinger's Cat – Observer Effect
But there’s another explanation for Schroedinger’s Cat…
 Double Slit Experiment
And thus, another explanation for our experiment…
 Schrödinger's Cat – Many World’s Theory
The Many World’s Theory
 Schrödinger's Cat – Many World’s Theory
“Anything that can happen, does happen”
 Schrödinger's Cat – Many World’s Theory
• There’s one universe where it’s alive
• And one where it’s dead
 Schrödinger's Cat – Many World’s Theory
• A new universe is created for each possibility
 Many World’s Theory
• There’s a universe where:
• Hitler won
• I teach English Literature
• Penicillin wasn’t invented
• Liverpool win titles
• Jose Mourinho is happy
 Observer Effect vs. Many World’s Theory
• Describe the difference between these two theories (4
marks)
 The Observer Effect
• Now it gets weirder…
 The Observer Effect
• It may not be that observing collapses the wave function…
 Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment
• An extremely complicated experiment in 1999 showed it might be
even stranger than this…
 Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment
• I’m going to simplify it…
 Simplified Explanation – Quantum Entanglement
•First – Quantum Entanglement/Entangled Pair
• A ‘connected’ pair of particles
 Simplified Explanation – Quantum Entanglement
• Actions performed on one affect the other, even when separated by great
distances
 Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment
• The experiment uses a special crystal which absorbs a photon, and creates two
new photos, each with half the energy…
 Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment
• An entangled pair of photons
 Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment
• This experiment uses a:
• Photon gun (laser)
• Double Slit
• Special crystal
• Photosensitive Screen
• Special system of Detectors
 Special Detectors
• They are able to detect which slit the photons went through AFTER it has hit the
screen
 Remember
• In Davisson–Germer’s experiment (1927) and reiterations, we detected:
• Before the slit
• After
• At the last nanosecond
 Copenhagen Interpretation
• All of these detections can collapse the wave function/superposition
 Detectors
• But these detectors can’t collapse the wave function before it hits the screen

• (The Copenhagen Interpretation)

 The Experiment
• Let’s go back to describing the experiment….
 Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment
• Photons are fired from the laser
• They might pass through slit 1 or 2
• Then that crystal breaks it into a pair
1
2
 Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment
• If an original photon goes through slit one:
• One photon in the pair goes to the screen
• One photon in the pair goes to detector A

1
2
 Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment
• If an original photon goes through slit two:
• One photon in the pair goes to the screen
• One photon in the pair goes to detector B

1
2
 Summary
• So we cannot possibly collapse the wave function through detection (observer
Effect)

1
2
• Why?
 Summary
• The detectors are set up so they detect which slit AFTER the other photon in the
pair has hit the screen

1
2
 Summary
• We cannot possibly collapse the fuzzy wave thing before it hits the screen

1
2
 Summary
• And we don’t mess with any photon on their way to the screen

1
2
 Summary
• We only detect the other one in the pair

1
2
 A Question
• What interference pattern should we see on the screen?
• Hint: Copenhagen Interpretation/Collapse Wave of Probability
 A Question
• We should see the wave interference pattern
 A Question
• But we don’t
• It’s a clump pattern
• Each photon went through one slit
 Speculation
• Why? Speculate
 Speculation: One
• One photon in the pair hit the screen
• Later the entangled partner retroactively changed the landing position?
 Speculation: Two
• The detected photon send a signal to its pair, to make it form a clump?
 Speculation: Three
• A signal is being sent, faster than the speed of light?
• Something outside of human comprehension?
 The Quantum Eraser
• Let’s keep going…

• This is the Quantum Eraser

 The Quantum Eraser
• It destroys any information about the photons
 Beam Splitters (Half-silvered mirrors)
• 50% of photons go through
• 50% reflected
 Beam Splitters (Half-silvered mirrors)
• 50% of photons go through
• 50% reflected
 Detector Madness!
• Half of the photons end up at A or B
• Half end up at C or D
 Quantum Eraser
• If C or D light up, we don’t know which slit they’ve came from
 Quantum Eraser
• It destroys the ‘which-path’ information
 Quantum Eraser
• If we only look at the photons which twins arrive at C or D
• And check the interference pattern from the twin

• What will we see?

 Quantum Eraser
• An interference pattern!
 Quantum Eraser
• An interference pattern!
 Quantum Eraser
• Despite the experiment containing detection!
 Quantum Eraser
• It’s not the observation actively collapsing the wave?

• Copenhagen interpretation is wrong?

 Interpretation
• It’s as if the photons know that the observer has lost the which-way
information, and will act like a wave again

•
 What does this mean?
• The act of knowing collapses the wave function?
 What does this mean?
•It can collapse, then uncollapse?!
 What does this mean?
• The past isn’t real?!
Appendix Note: Current With Frequency