Why the Afshar experiment does not refute complementarity

DOI10.1016/J.SHPSB.2005.04.006MaRDI QIDQ640100zbMATH OpenOpenAlexWikidataFDO

Authors Ruth E. Kastner

Publication date 17 October 2011

Published in Studies in History and Philosophy of Science. Part B. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0502021

zbMATH Keywords

complementarityquantum mechanicstransactional interpretationtime symmetry

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

General and philosophical questions in quantum theory (81P05) History of quantum theory (81-03) Quantum field theory; related classical field theories (81T99)

Abstract: A modified version of Young's experiment by Shahriar Afshar demonstrates that, prior to what appears to be a ``which-way measurement, an interference pattern exists. Afshar has claimed that this result constitutes a violation of the Principle of Complementarity. This paper discusses the implications of this experiment and considers how Cramer's Transactional Interpretation easily accomodates the result. It is also shown that the Afshar experiment is analogous in key respects to a spin one-half particle prepared as ``spin up along $$, subjected to a nondestructive confirmation of that preparation, and post-selected in a specific state of spin along $$. The terminology ``which-way or ``which-slit is critiqued; it is argued that this usage by both Afshar and his critics is misleading and has contributed to confusion surrounding the interpretation of the experiment. Nevertheless, it is concluded that Bohr would have had no more problem accounting for the Afshar result than he would in accounting for the aforementioned pre- and post-selection spin experiment, in which the particle's preparation state is confirmed by a nondestructive measurement prior to post-selection. In addition, some new inferences about the interpretation of delayed choice experiments are drawn from the analysis.

Recommendations

• Afshar's experiment does not show a violation of complementarity
• Transcendental versus quantitative meanings of Bohr's complementarity principle
• Simulation of Afshar's double slit experiment
• Complementarity paradox solved: surprising consequences
• Reply to comments of Steuernagel on the Afshar's experiment

Cited in

(16)

• Critique of quantum optical experimental refutations of Bohr's principle of complementarity, of the Wootters-Zurek principle of complementarity, and of the particle-wave duality relation
• Quantum histories and quantum complementarity
• No paradox in wave-particle duality
• Reply to comments of Steuernagel on the Afshar's experiment
• Young's experiment and the finiteness of information
• Understanding modified two-slit experiments using path markers
• Logical analysis of the Bohr complementarity principle in Afshar's experiment under the NAFL interpretation
• Afshar's experiment does not show a violation of complementarity
• Complementarity paradox solved: surprising consequences
• Simulation of Afshar's double slit experiment
• On delayed choice and contingent absorber experiments
• Transcendental versus quantitative meanings of Bohr's complementarity principle
• Limitations imposed by complementarity
• Welcher weg experiments, duality and the orthodox Bohr's complementarity principle
• Ether, the theory of relativity and quantum physics
• Complementarity revisited

This page was built for publication: Why the Afshar experiment does not refute complementarity

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q640100)