7.2: Single-Photon Interference - Second Version

Last updated
Save as PDF

Page ID: 137792

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \) \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)\(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)\(\newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

Using Dirac Notation to Analyze Single Particle Interference

The schematic diagram below shows a Mach-Zehnder interferometer for photons. When the experiment is run so that there is only one photon in the apparatus at any time, the photon is always detected at D₂ and never at D₁. (1,2,3)

The quantum mechanical analysis of this striking phenomenon is outlined below. The photon leaves the source, S, and whether it takes the upper or lower path it interacts with a beam splitter, a mirror, and another beam splitter before reaching the detectors. At the beam splitters there is a 50% chance that the photon will be transmitted and a 50% chance that it will be reflected.

Screen Shot 2019-02-20 at 12.16.38 PM.png

After the first beam splitter the photon is in an even linear superposition of being transmitted and reflected. Reflection involves a 90^o (π/2) phase change which is represented by exp(iπ/2) = i, where i = (-1)1/2. (See the appendix for a simple justification of the 90^o phase difference between transmission and reflection.) Thus the state after the first beam is given by equation 257.1.

\[ | \psi = \left( \frac{[ | T> + i|R ]}{2} \right) ^{ \frac{1}{2}} \nonumber \]

\[ |T> = \left( \frac{[|D1> + i|D2>]}{2} \right) ^{ \frac{1}{2}} \nonumber \]

|R> reaches |D₁> by reflection and |D₂> by transmission.

\[ |R> = \left( \frac{[i|D1> + |D2>]}{2} \right) ^{ \frac{1}{2}} \nonumber \]

Equations 257.2 and 257.3 are substituted into equation 257.1.

\[ | \psi > = \frac{[|D1> + i|D2> + i2|D1> + i|D2>]}{2} \nonumber \]

It is clear (i² = -1) that the first and third terms cancel (the amplitudes are 180^o out of phase), so that we end up with a final state given by equation 257.5.

\[ | \psi> = i|D_2> \nonumber \] The probability of an event is the square of the absolute magnitude of the probability amplitude.

\[ P(D_2) = |i|^2 = 1 \nonumber \]

Thus this analysis is in agreement with the experimental outcome that no photons are ever detected at D₁.

Appendix:

Suppose there is no phase difference between transmission and reflection. Then equations 257.1, 257.2, and 257.3 become

\[ | \psi = \left( \frac{[|T> + |R>]}{2} \right) ^{ \frac{1}{2}} \nonumber \]

\[ | T> = \left( \frac{[|D1> + |D2>]}{2} \right) ^{ \frac{1}{2}} \nonumber \]

\[ | \psi = \left( \frac{[|D_1> + |D_2> |D_1> + D_2>]}{2} \right) ^{ \frac{1}{2}} \nonumber \]

Substitution of equations 257.8 and 257.9 into equation 257.7 yields

\[ | \psi > = |D_1> + |D_2> \nonumber \]

Thus, the detection probabilities at the two detectors are:

\[ P(D_1) = 1 and P(D_2) = 1 \nonumber \]

This result violates the principle of conservation of energy because the original photon has a probability of 1 of being detected at D₁ and also a probability of 1 of being detected at D₂. In other words, the number of photons has doubled. Thus, there must be a phase difference between transmission and reflection, and a 90^o phase difference, as shown above, conserves energy.

References:

1. P. Grangier, G. Roger, and A. Aspect, "Experimental Evidence for Photon Anticorrelation Effects on a Beam Splitter: A New Light on Single Interferences," Europhys. Lett. 1, 173-179 (1986).

2. V. Scarani and A. Suarez, "Introducing Quantum Mechanics: One-particle Interferences," Am. J. Phys. 66, 718-721 (1998).

3. Kwiat, P, Weinfurter, H., and Zeilinger, A, "Quantum Seeing in the Dark, Sci. Amer. Nov. 1996, pp 72-78.