For a paper on the experiment, arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0610241.pdf From the abstract, "The quantum “mystery which cannot go away” (in Feynman’s words) of wave-particle duality is illustrated in a striking way by Wheeler’s delayed-choice GedankenExperiment. In this experiment, the configuration of a two-path interferometer is chosen after a single-photon pulse has entered it : either the interferometer is closed (i.e. the two paths are recombined) and the interference is observed, or the interferometer remains open and the path followed by the photon is measured. We report an almost ideal realization of that GedankenExperiment, where the light pulses are true single photons, allowing unambiguous which-way measurements, and the interferometer, which has two spatially separated paths, produces high visibility interference. The choice between measuring either the open or closed configuration is made by a quantum random number generator, and is space-like separated - in the relativistic sense - from the entering of the photon into the interferometer. Measurements in the closed configuration show interference with a visibility of 94%, while measurements in the open configuration allow us to determine the followed path with an error probability lower than 1% Great lecture, thank you.
The strangeness of the dual nature of the photon is investigated in this presentation and the associated research papers, which are published in a well-respected journal (Science). The experiment is not aiming to consider the influence of entangled photons, which is sometimes considered within the context of a Wheeler Delayed Choice experiment. This is a similar demonstration of the seeming change in the photon behaviour, between single photon self-interference (wave-like property) and particle flow by two paths. The confusing part of this experiment to me is that blocking one path or another of the particle flow (measured one photon at a time) shows that almost all photons pass on to one of the detectors when the path to the other detector is blocked. This is highly strange! Can anyone explain this???
There are no particles. There is nothing strange about any of this except for the fact the people keep repeating completely useless semi-classical mental constructs some 90 years after the real solution had been found. :-)
If the Universe is Quantum, a function-formula for the standing wave-particle (the primordial atom, eternity now is apparently infinitely distributed as it's reciprocal, insideout), then the combination of Einstein's rubber sheet/exponential vortex and Bohm's Pilot wave theory could be combined as the frequency/shells integration of Superspin modulation in this timespace singularity. Because the probability of relative locations is distributed infinitely in relative wave-particle packages, according to the laws of physics and the tuning of the wave-particle resonance to the effective field connection. (Briefly) Quantum has no absolute-particular "size", only relative quantity of quality-functionally. (?) ..Implies eternity now is "empty" space, no-thing, because it's filled with points with position but no size, and everything in this instant now, in functional relative proportions of possibility-probability. If the concept of brane collisions creating this q-information condensed+inflation universe is reversed, and interpreted as quantum resonance field intersection+projection, then the characteristics of vanishing point objective particles exist whenever and wherever multiple modulation frequencies become superimposed, ..probability objectives at reciprocal cofactors of primes. => "paradoxical" Super-properties of entanglement and conduction, instantaneous distribution of information in Quantum Fields and physical properties etc.
This sounds like computer generated giberish... Was it generated in this way? (For those interested how such texts are generated, search for "Sokal affair")
@@ANSIcode yes it should sound like computer generated information, being derived from the wave-packaging mechanism that is the lecture topic. You will interpret it as gibberish because that reflects your own state of mind.
@@yacc1706 According to QM coincidence would happen even with single photons, so you can't use classical physics to set the foundation of a theory that rejects the same assumptions.
@@mimArmand Please, give more details about "According to QM..." I don't understand you, yet. I think you are referring to "coincidences" in both detectors with "high intensity light", maybe. The "goal" of Aspect was obtain a source of "low intensity ligth" that gave him a "click" at a time. At 22:10, Aspect is explaining an "ideal" experiment, with 2 slits, both with a detector after the slit (the "which way" mode, instead a screen with an interference pattern). But think of a CCD chip, where "each pixel is a detector". The "goal" is obtain a "click" at a time in ONLY ONE pixel each time. This is "equivalent" to the "accumulative" pattern of a single slit in a screen: one "spot" at a time. But the "goal" is obtain no coincidence between all pixels at a given time
@@yacc1706 not true, to me sounds like he’s saying the lack of coincidence ( which is expected in the which way mode, as you mentioned ) guarantees that there were only one photon emitted at each event, and I don’t see how that is guaranteed! Also no mention of the number of tries and the results? I might be missing something but I don’t understand how the lack of coincidence ( which, again, is expected ) unequivocally guarantees single photons? ( couldn’t a bunch of photons hit the sensor ? How is this provide any more guarantee than other experiments? )
@@mimArmand Photons don't interact, hence the number of photons doesn't matter. People need to get a grip on reality and get past the single photon internet meme. That's just pure bullshit.
Self-defining Singularity Timing-spacing, is the cause-effect of Infinity/eternity "divided by" = equivalent to differentiates and reintegrates e-Pi-i @.dt, superposition of Zero-infinity=> Temporal implied functional Superspin.., =>sum-of-all-histories of abstract component concepts is The Observable Conception, Eternity-now Interval.., Universe. Ie some Actuality of functionality in no thing of superimposed pulsed-events of trancendental logarithmic condensation modulation-> primary-sync Math-Phys-Chem and Geometry here-now-forever formatting in mass-energy-momentum continuous creation connection. The "point" of it all is self-defining empirical shaping e-Pi-i sync-duration Singularity. "The Universe is a Point" temporal superposition property.
While I very much respect and appreciate Prof Aspect for the clarity he brings to this problem, the only thing capable of being emitted from a particle (eg electron) at instantaneous lightspeed is a wave, not a smaller particle. Prof Aspects now famous experiment depends on the emission of a photonic "particle" at instantaneous lightspeed and maintaining that speed forever. However only a wave can be instantaneously emitted at lightspeed and maintain that speed forever. A particle, even with zero rest mass, cannot attain instantaneous lightspeed if only due to the momentum acquired during acceleration. However, an electromagnetic wave is only emitted at instantaneous lightspeed and maintains that speed perpetually. Prof Aspect is repeating the error of his predecessors by producing a wavelet, not a particle. The evidence offered for a particle emission is necessarily statistical, very marginal, and underwhelming. My view is that light can only propagate as a wave, but it can never be observed during propagation, only at the endpoints of emission and capture from/into a host particle. It is at the endpoints that particle like properties will be observed, albeit indirectly. The 'quantum quackery' that has arisen from this single experiment is quite understandable, however, quantum entanglement is absolutely not established by this flawed experiment. Neither is faster than light travel, travel into the past, multiverses (etc, etc, etc...). God does not play dice.... :-)
So if I build a detector (for example at the slits in the double slit experminent) the detector gives energy to the wave before detecting the photon? Because otherwise the photon would not have enough energy to travel at the speed of light?
For a paper on the experiment, arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0610241.pdf
From the abstract,
"The quantum “mystery which cannot go away” (in Feynman’s words) of wave-particle duality is illustrated in a
striking way by Wheeler’s delayed-choice GedankenExperiment. In this experiment, the configuration of a two-path interferometer is chosen after a single-photon pulse has entered it : either the interferometer is closed (i.e. the two paths are recombined) and the interference is observed, or the interferometer remains open and the path followed
by the photon is measured. We report an almost ideal realization of that GedankenExperiment, where the light
pulses are true single photons, allowing unambiguous which-way measurements, and the interferometer, which has two spatially separated paths, produces high visibility interference. The choice between measuring either the open or closed configuration is made by a quantum random number generator, and is space-like separated - in the relativistic sense - from the entering of the photon into the interferometer. Measurements in the closed configuration show interference with a visibility of 94%, while measurements in the open configuration allow us to determine the followed path with an error probability lower than 1%
Great lecture, thank you.
Love this topic!
The strangeness of the dual nature of the photon is investigated in this presentation and the associated research papers, which are published in a well-respected journal (Science). The experiment is not aiming to consider the influence of entangled photons, which is sometimes considered within the context of a Wheeler Delayed Choice experiment. This is a similar demonstration of the seeming change in the photon behaviour, between single photon self-interference (wave-like property) and particle flow by two paths. The confusing part of this experiment to me is that blocking one path or another of the particle flow (measured one photon at a time) shows that almost all photons pass on to one of the detectors when the path to the other detector is blocked. This is highly strange! Can anyone explain this???
There are no particles. There is nothing strange about any of this except for the fact the people keep repeating completely useless semi-classical mental constructs some 90 years after the real solution had been found. :-)
If the Universe is Quantum, a function-formula for the standing wave-particle (the primordial atom, eternity now is apparently infinitely distributed as it's reciprocal, insideout), then the combination of Einstein's rubber sheet/exponential vortex and Bohm's Pilot wave theory could be combined as the frequency/shells integration of Superspin modulation in this timespace singularity.
Because the probability of relative locations is distributed infinitely in relative wave-particle packages, according to the laws of physics and the tuning of the wave-particle resonance to the effective field connection.
(Briefly) Quantum has no absolute-particular "size", only relative quantity of quality-functionally. (?)
..Implies eternity now is "empty" space, no-thing, because it's filled with points with position but no size, and everything in this instant now, in functional relative proportions of possibility-probability.
If the concept of brane collisions creating this q-information condensed+inflation universe is reversed, and interpreted as quantum resonance field intersection+projection, then the characteristics of vanishing point objective particles exist whenever and wherever multiple modulation frequencies become superimposed, ..probability objectives at reciprocal cofactors of primes. => "paradoxical" Super-properties of entanglement and conduction, instantaneous distribution of information in Quantum Fields and physical properties etc.
This sounds like computer generated giberish... Was it generated in this way? (For those interested how such texts are generated, search for "Sokal affair")
@@ANSIcode yes it should sound like computer generated information, being derived from the wave-packaging mechanism that is the lecture topic. You will interpret it as gibberish because that reflects your own state of mind.
@23:14 "Lack of concidences: smoking gun for single photon source"... I don't think so!
Please, give more details on your claim
@@yacc1706 According to QM coincidence would happen even with single photons, so you can't use classical physics to set the foundation of a theory that rejects the same assumptions.
@@mimArmand Please, give more details about "According to QM..." I don't understand you, yet. I think you are referring to "coincidences" in both detectors with "high intensity light", maybe. The "goal" of Aspect was obtain a source of "low intensity ligth" that gave him a "click" at a time. At 22:10, Aspect is explaining an "ideal" experiment, with 2 slits, both with a detector after the slit (the "which way" mode, instead a screen with an interference pattern). But think of a CCD chip, where "each pixel is a detector". The "goal" is obtain a "click" at a time in ONLY ONE pixel each time. This is "equivalent" to the "accumulative" pattern of a single slit in a screen: one "spot" at a time. But the "goal" is obtain no coincidence between all pixels at a given time
@@yacc1706 not true, to me sounds like he’s saying the lack of coincidence ( which is expected in the which way mode, as you mentioned ) guarantees that there were only one photon emitted at each event, and I don’t see how that is guaranteed! Also no mention of the number of tries and the results? I might be missing something but I don’t understand how the lack of coincidence ( which, again, is expected ) unequivocally guarantees single photons? ( couldn’t a bunch of photons hit the sensor ? How is this provide any more guarantee than other experiments? )
@@mimArmand Photons don't interact, hence the number of photons doesn't matter. People need to get a grip on reality and get past the single photon internet meme. That's just pure bullshit.
Self-defining Singularity Timing-spacing, is the cause-effect of Infinity/eternity "divided by" = equivalent to differentiates and reintegrates e-Pi-i @.dt, superposition of Zero-infinity=> Temporal implied functional Superspin.., =>sum-of-all-histories of abstract component concepts is The Observable Conception, Eternity-now Interval.., Universe.
Ie some Actuality of functionality in no thing of superimposed pulsed-events of trancendental logarithmic condensation modulation-> primary-sync Math-Phys-Chem and Geometry here-now-forever formatting in mass-energy-momentum continuous creation connection.
The "point" of it all is self-defining empirical shaping e-Pi-i sync-duration Singularity. "The Universe is a Point" temporal superposition property.
Muito bom.
While I very much respect and appreciate Prof Aspect for the clarity he brings to this problem, the only thing capable of being emitted from a particle (eg electron) at instantaneous lightspeed is a wave, not a smaller particle. Prof Aspects now famous experiment depends on the emission of a photonic "particle" at instantaneous lightspeed and maintaining that speed forever. However only a wave can be instantaneously emitted at lightspeed and maintain that speed forever. A particle, even with zero rest mass, cannot attain instantaneous lightspeed if only due to the momentum acquired during acceleration. However, an electromagnetic wave is only emitted at instantaneous lightspeed and maintains that speed perpetually. Prof Aspect is repeating the error of his predecessors by producing a wavelet, not a particle. The evidence offered for a particle emission is necessarily statistical, very marginal, and underwhelming. My view is that light can only propagate as a wave, but it can never be observed during propagation, only at the endpoints of emission and capture from/into a host particle. It is at the endpoints that particle like properties will be observed, albeit indirectly. The 'quantum quackery' that has arisen from this single experiment is quite understandable, however, quantum entanglement is absolutely not established by this flawed experiment. Neither is faster than light travel, travel into the past, multiverses (etc, etc, etc...). God does not play dice.... :-)
What method does your own experiment employ, and where might I find a publication of its results?
Why +Chris James ?
So if I build a detector (for example at the slits in the double slit experminent) the detector gives energy to the wave before detecting the photon? Because otherwise the photon would not have enough energy to travel at the speed of light?
The claims in this statement (by Marcus Anderson) are wrong according to modern physics.
Very interesting video and i shared to my friends .
Also i suggest you see some interesting videos on SALEH THEORY-com about behaviors of photon.