Physicists have confirmed the two foundational postulates of Richard Feynman’s path-integral approach to quantum mechanics in a real-world experiment for the first time. This comes nearly 80 years after Feynman first published his path-integral formulation, which describes the time evolution of quantum systems.
Fundamental thought experiments, such as Schrödinger’s cat, the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox and the quantum double-slit experiment have always been important for developing the theories of quantum mechanics. As technology improves, some thought experiments have been realized in the lab, confirming many aspects of quantum theory. However, thought and real experiments thus far have not addressed the fundamental question: how do quantum systems evolve between initial and final states? This question, explains Shi-Liang Zhu of South China Normal University in Guangzhou, lies at the heart of Feynman’s path integral postulates for his famous propagator equation.
The postulates, first proposed in 1948, have never been directly tested – despite their foundational role in modern physics. Indeed, the path-integral formulation has been critical for the development of fields ranging from quantum field theory to cosmology and has provided a unified framework that connects quantum mechanics with classical physics through the principle of least action. The path integral’s predictions also underpin modern quantum science, from condensed matter physics to quantum statistical physics.
As quantum theory was developed, several “pictures” emerged of how a quantum system evolves with time – including the Schrödinger and Heisenberg pictures. The Schrödinger equation, the Heisenberg equation and the Feynman propagator equation are formally equivalent formulations of quantum mechanics, explains Zhu. “However, while the first two are typically treated as fundamental postulates, the Feynman propagator equation is derived from two underlying postulates. This derivational asymmetry makes experimental tests of Feynman’s postulates particularly compelling.”
The first postulate is that a quantum particle does not travel along a single trajectory when moving from point A to point B; and instead every probable path contributes to its trajectory. The second postulate is that all possible paths have the same probability (or equal-magnitude amplitudes) and differ only by a path-dependent phase factor. This is very different from simply summing all the probabilities as in classical physics.
At time ti, explains Zhu, a particle is localized at xi with its wave function denoted as ψ(xi, ti). The probability of the particle reaching xf at time tf is therefore determined through all possible paths connecting points A at (xi, ti) and B at (xf,tf). The j-th path contributes a probability amplitude ϕj.
Feynman postulated that the probability P of the particle reaching xf at time tf equals the absolute square of the sum of probability amplitudes ϕj for all paths. As mentioned, all these contribute equally in magnitude, with each contribution’s phase being given by the classical action (in units of the Planck constant, ħ).
“We have now directly measured the probability amplitudes ϕj of more than 1.4 million possible paths taken by single photons in an optical system,” says Zhu. “We did this by dividing the region between the starting point A and the end point B into a grid of points. We connected adjacent points by line segments and then measured the propagator for each segment. In total, there are 175 possible paths.”
The results from this experiment, which is detailed in Science Advances, validate the first postulate with a mean absolute percentage error of 4.45% and a fidelity of 94.9%. They also confirm the second postulate with 94.7% fidelity.
The paper’s first author Yong-Li Wen notes: “because there were so many possible paths that the photons could take, the primary challenge in our experiments was to achieve sufficient accuracy to reconstruct millions of path amplitudes, since even marginal errors in individual propagator measurements accumulate multiplicatively, destroying phase coherence and rendering the reconstructed path distribution nearly random.
“We overcame this problem through four key technical advancements: amplifying the signals; designing a customized high-precision imaging system; implementing real-time normalization via a reference beam to correct for photon fluctuation errors; and making sure the set-up was mechanically stable on the nanoscale.”
These innovations improved single-photon propagator fidelity from 87.6% to 98.5%, something that allowed the team to resolve the global structure of path amplitudes with unprecedented precision.
The work establishes a powerful experimental framework for investigating path integrals in quantum systems, Zhu tells Physics World. “By confirming that quantum probabilities arise from path interference and that phases are governed by classical action, we provide experimental evidence supporting the view that quantum paths reflect physical reality rather than being mere mathematical artefacts.”
The high-precision propagator methodology could also be used to study quantum-to-classical transitions and decoherence mechanisms, where understanding the role of interfering paths is essential, he adds. And it could be extended to probe fundamental phenomena such, as entangled histories and indefinite causal order across multiple space–time points.
Beyond fundamental physics, the technique may make quantum simulations of complex condensed matter and quantum field theory phenomena, including instantons and magnetic monopoles, easier. “Perhaps most excitingly, by enabling precise propagator measurements in diverse environments, this framework could eventually be extended to interacting systems and curved space–times, allowing for valuable experiments with artificial quantum systems,” says Zhu.
The post Single-photon measurements confirm Richard Feynman’s vision of quantum mechanics appeared first on Physics World.
A new quantum test of the weak equivalence principle performed on the China Space Station using cold atom interferometry is the most precise to date, yielding an uncertainty of 2.8 x 10-8 and a test result of around –2.7 x 10-7. Meanwhile, a separate team in Israel, Germany and the UK has measured an object’s quantum phase in freefall in the laboratory and confirmed that Einstein’s equivalence principle holds here too.
The weak equivalence principle (WEP), or the “universality of freefall”, is an important pillar of Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity, in which mass and gravity are intimately linked to the curvature of space–time. The WEP states that, in the absence of other forces, all objects fall with the same acceleration under the influence of gravity regardless of their mass or composition. In other words, gravitational mass (the m in F = GMm/r2, where F is the gravitational attraction between two masses placed a distance r apart and G is the gravitational constant) and inertial mass (the m in F = ma, where a is the acceleration produced by the force F) are the same.
Precisely measuring this principle is crucial since any detected violation could point to new physics. It is also important for continuing to corroborate the theory of general relativity, which may be incomplete because it appears to be fundamentally incompatible with another well-tested theory: quantum mechanics. Today, tests of the WEP using macroscopic bodies have reached extraordinary precision – at the 10−13 level on Earth and 10−15 in space. These latest studies investigate the principle in the quantum realm.
Conventional interferometry works by splitting a coherent beam of light and then recombining the different components at a detector. If the two components are in phase when they recombine, the interference is constructive and the two components reinforce each other. However, if the two components are out of phase, they cancel each other out, leading to a characteristic pattern of bright and dark fringes. Atomic interferometry is similar but relies on beams of atoms rather than beams of light.
Cold atom interferometry (CAI), which is atomic interferometry at ultracold temperatures of just above absolute zero, has found applications in inertial sensing and fundamental physics research. It also turns out to be a powerful technique for testing the WEP.
There is a problem with using CAI on Earth, however, because our planet’s gravity limits the interference time of the atom beams to just a few seconds. Experiments in microgravity allow this time to be extended to minutes, but because the resolution of a WEP test scales inversely with the square of the interference time, even longer interference times are needed to achieve the required precision (10−17 or more). This necessitates a permanent microgravity environment, something that is only possible in space.
In the new work, detailed in Science Advances, a team of physicists led by Mingsheng Zhan from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hefei National Laboratory and Wuhan Institute of Quantum Technology sent their experiments to be performed onboard the China Space Station, using the cold atom interferometer installed on its High Microgravity Level Research Rack. This instrument contains clouds of billions of 85Rb and 87Rb atoms that interfere when probed with counterpropagating Raman lasers reflected by a piezo tilt mirror.
By exciting and detecting the fluorescence of the isotopes sequentially at slightly different times, the researchers obtained two sets of symmetric interference images, one from the 85Rb atoms and one from the 87Rb atoms. Measuring the differential phase of these images – after suppressing the residual acceleration of the space station and effects from vibrations – allowed them to calculate the difference in the acceleration between the two isotopes in the vertical, freefalling direction.
After running their experiment for 280 days, during which time the researchers acquired more than 9700 pairs of interference fringes, they obtained a test result of around –2.7 x 10-7, after correcting for errors.
“We believe that our technique will have a significant impact,” says Zhan. “First, it demonstrates that an integrated interferometer meeting the requirements of in-orbit operation is possible, giving the community confidence to continue with even more technically demanding space-based interferometry experiments that aim for ever increasing precision. The technology developed in this project will also itself help advance atom-interferometry-based instruments, such asinertial navigation systems.”
Meanwhile, physicists at the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, the University of Ulm and the University of Oxford have also used CAI, this time to measure an object’s quantum phase in freefall. They confirm that the effect is the same as predicted by Einstein’s equivalence principle (EP), which states that for an observer in freefall, gravity should locally disappear.
In their work, also detailed in Science Advances, the researchers used a completely novel version of the CAI technique that they call the Quantum Galileo Interferometer (QGI) – in honour of Galileo Galilei’s discoveries regarding the laws of freefall. The experiment, which was carried out at Ben-Gurion University, again makes use of clouds of 87Rb atoms cooled to just above absolute zero.
The researchers began by applying microwave pulses to put the ultracold atoms – which were placed 113 µm below the surface of an atom chip containing current-carrying wires that produce magnetic field gradients – into a quantum superposition. This meant that each atom effectively travels along two different paths at once. One part of the atomic wave responded to the magnetic fields such that an applied upward force exactly counteracted the downward pull of gravity and the wave was held stationary in the apparatus – that is, static relative to Earth. This part of the wave is referred to as the reference atomic wave (or wavepacket). The second part of the wave was sent upwards in a ballistic trajectory.
Realising this ballistic trajectory, affected only by gravity, required a “magnetic cannon” and a “magnetic parachute”, explains Ron Folman, who is one of the leaders of this study. “After the short-duration magnetic cannon, we switched this part of the wave into a state that is almost unaffected by the magnetic field so that it could fall freely under gravity. And at the end of the fall, we used another precisely controlled magnetic pulse to stop the relative motion between the two waves and reunite the two parts so that they interfered with each other.”
That interference allowed the researchers to measure the tiny difference in quantum phase accumulated while one was falling and the other was held still — two frames that may be referred to as the Einsteinian and the Newtonian frames, respectively. This means that when both parts of the wave have the same velocity, the transformation between the wavefunction in a Newtonian (laboratory) frame of reference and the wavefunction of the same object in an Einsteinian frame that freefalls with the same acceleration, involves a transformation phase known as a gauge phase.
According to their experiments, the gauge phase measured by the researchers is the same as the one predicted when Einstein’s EP is applied to such a quantum wave, so confirming the principle for these quantum objects and at these low masses and energies.
“Some members of our team,” notes Folman, “including Nobel laureate Sir Roger Penrose, expect this co-existence between general relativity and quantum mechanics to break for objects with higher masses. Indeed, the Ben-Gurion University group is now repeating the same experiment with nanodiamond particles to test this hypothesis,” he tells Physics World.
The observation, says study co-leader Vlatko Vedral at Oxford University’s department of physics, constitutes a fundamental test of the interface between quantum theory and gravity. “The connection between these two pillars of modern physics remains one of the most important open questions in physics, and it is thus of paramount importance to understand the phenomenon of freefall and the EP in the quantum domain.”
The post Einstein’s equivalence principle put to two new tests appeared first on Physics World.
Researchers used a specially designed cavity to strengthen quantum vacuum fluctuations and enhance superconductivity in a thin material. Empty space is not truly empty. Even a vacuum contains restless quantum fluctuations, and researchers have now shown for the first time that these normally subtle effects can be engineered to strengthen superconductivity. The work, led by [...]Scientists have turned ordinary sunlight into a source of quantum entanglement, opening a surprising path toward more energy-efficient quantum technology. Quantum technologies often depend on powerful lasers that consume significant amounts of energy. As these systems grow larger and more widespread, their energy requirements could become an increasingly important concern. Now, researchers have demonstrated that [...]Almost a hundred years ago, physicists theorized out what free fall should do to a quantum wave. If the solution they came up with is wrong, quantum mechanics and Einstein's theory of gravity flatly contradict each other. But testing it has been impossible because nobody has managed to build an interferometer that could perform the necessary measurement.
Now, a team led by Ron Folman, a physicist at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, with collaborators in Germany, the UK, and the US, including Nobel laureate Roger Penrose, has done it. They built a new interferometer that gives a single atom two possible paths at once: one that involves a free fall, and another where it is held perfectly still. Both paths end at the same place at the same moment, allowing the team to measure what the fall does to a wave-like property of the atom.
Ever since Galileo, physicists have known how to describe a falling object—where it is, how fast it goes, or how quickly it accelerates. Quantum mechanics, though, insists that every object is also a wave. “Every particle, doesn't matter if it's a car or a spaceship or an atom, is a wave,” Folman says. “Everything that is a wave, like sea waves or sound waves, goes up and down. And if you're up or down, this is measured by something called a phase. A phase just tells you if you are at the top of the wave or at the bottom.”
© ALIOUI Mohammed Elamine
A new theoretical approach helps connect quantum physics with classical thermodynamics by clarifying what counts as heat and useful work in tiny quantum machines. When a machine is reduced to a single atom and particles of light, even basic concepts such as heat and useful work become difficult to define. This problem sits at the [...]
For the first time, physicists in Japan have carried out an atomic-scale version of the double-slit experiment. Using an ultraprecise electron beam channelled along two adjacent columns of atoms in a crystal of silicon, Naoya Shibata and colleagues at the University of Tokyo observed clear interference fringes in electrons scattered by the atoms: fringes that persisted even at high temperature, thanks to correlations in the atoms’ thermal vibrations.
The double-slit experiment is perhaps the most iconic demonstration in quantum mechanics: showing how a single particle’s wavefunction interferes with itself as it passes through two slits at once, with a tangible impact on where the particle is ultimately observed.
In practical research, this effect is now routinely harnessed in electron, neutron and atom interferometers. By observing the interference fringes that it creates, researchers can extract valuable information about both the quantum matter wave and whatever object is doing the diffracting.
Recently, physicists have attempted to push double-slit interferometry all the way down to the atomic scale, replacing conventional slits with crystal lattices. When a moving electron encounters an atom in a crystal, it scatters across a range of angles – producing an outgoing spherical wave that’s mathematically identical to the diffraction pattern from a classical slit.
Since atoms in a crystal sit at such well-defined separations, any neighbouring pair of them could, in principle, act as a double-slit interferometer. In reality, however, the many repeated unit cells in a crystal mean the resulting interference fringes are washed out, making it difficult to isolate the signal from a single atomic pair.
To address this challenge, Shibata’s team used the ultraprecise probe of a 4D scanning transmission electron microscope: an instrument designed to capture electron diffraction patterns with a pixellated detector. Fired into a pure silicon crystal at just the right orientation, the microscope’s precision let the researchers target two adjacent columns of aligned silicon atoms, separated by just 136 pm. As a result, the electron wave overlapped both columns, and no others.
“Our key idea was to use these two atomic columns as the two slits,” describes team member Takehito Seki. “By channelling the probe along both columns at once, we turned them into two coherent scattering sources – effectively making the crystal itself into an atomic-scale double-slit interferometer.”
At this scale, Shibata and Seki’s team created electron interference fringes some seven orders of magnitude smaller than in Thomas Young’s original double-slit experiment with light, first carried out in 1801.
Just as in a larger-scale experiment, these patterns encoded information about the crystal and the electron beam. But at this scale, the researchers could also detect the signature of individual phonon modes in the columns. Rather than destroying coherence as uncorrelated atomic motion would in a classical picture, these correlated vibrations between the two atomic columns kept them moving in sync, preserving the interference.
“In a which-path picture, relative motion of the two atomic columns makes the two electron pathways more distinguishable and reduces the interference, whereas correlated in-phase motion preserves coherence,” Shibata explains. As a result, distinct interference fringes remained visible across temperatures ranging from 300 to 900 K.
The team’s results already point to how an atomic-scale double-slit experiment could offer new ways to measure phonon correlations directly between single pairs of atoms. But as Shibata explains, the possible applications could stretch much further.
“It also opens a route to probing local lattice dynamics at the scale of individual atomic bonds, including at interfaces and defects, where local lattice dynamics can strongly influence thermal transport,” he says. “In the long run, such atomic-scale insight could help inform better thermal management strategies for future chip technologies.”
The study is published in Nature.
The post Researchers shrink double-slit experiment to atomic scale appeared first on Physics World.
An international research team has announced the first-ever successful observation of gravity’s effect on a falling quantum object, demonstrating a connection between gravity and the quantum world first predicted by Albert Einstein.
The research team said the result does not unify quantum mechanics and gravity, nor does it prove that gravity is a quantum phenomenon.
However, the researchers said their study offers experimental support that Einstein’s equivalence principle, a fundamental concept at the heart of the famed scientist’s theory of gravity, remains consistent with matter in the quantum world.
When physicists want to describe nature, they rely on two distinct sets of rules. Einstein’s theory of gravity explains the mechanics of large-scale phenomena like stars and galaxies. Conversely, quantum mechanics helps scientists characterize the behavior of extremely small objects. Still, finding a scientific bridge uniting the two sets of rules has proven elusive.
“These two pillars of modern physics have so far eluded all attempts at a unified theoretical framework,” explained Professor Ron Folman from Ben-Gurion University of the Negev and the lead author of the new study.
Einstein did, however, identify one mechanism where the two worlds meet. Called the equivalence principle, the concept says that gravity should effectively disappear for an observer in free fall. For example, NASA simulates zero-gravity environments by flying astronauts in a plane, making successive rising and falling parabolic arcs. During the short periods of falling, the astronauts briefly experience ‘weightlessness” due to the equivalence principle.
Curious if the same phenomena would apply to the quantum world, the research team, which included Nobel Prize-winning physicist Professor Sir Roger Penrose, designed experiments. According to a statement announcing the research, the team hoped their setup would allow them to measure a “distinctive change in the quantum properties of atoms as they fell under gravity.”
To search for gravity’s effect in the quantum world, the researchers created clouds of rubidium atoms cooled to just above absolute zero. The researchers used a specially designed atom chip that allowed the team to manipulate the ultracold rubidium atoms.
Next, PhD student Or Dobkowski and colleagues used microwave pulses to place the atoms in quantum superposition. This unique quantum state lets each atom travel down two paths at once.
Using tiny electrical wires embedded on the specialized chip, the researchers generated tunable magnetic fields. The researchers said the field’s precision tunability allowed them to apply an upward force to one half of the atomic wave. For this experiment, the team created a magnetic field at the precise strength needed to counter gravity, effectively holding that half of the wave stationary relative to Earth.
After suspending the first half of the wave, the team used a magnetic pulse to lift the second part. Then, the team switched to a state almost unaffected by the magnetic field, allowing it to fall under gravity.
Once the second half completed its fall, the team used magnetic fields to reunite the two halves. When reunited, the two halves of the atomic wave interfered with each other. The researchers said that interaction allowed them to “measure the tiny difference in quantum phase accumulated while one was falling and the other was held still.”
“The phase measured in the new experiment is the same as the one predicted when Einstein’s principle is applied to such a quantum wave,” they explained.
When discussing the results, the research team said their result should not be construed as proof that gravity is quantum. The results also do not unite gravity and quantum mechanics. However, Folman noted, “this complex experiment gives more hints as to how such a unification may be achieved.”
Study co-author Professor Vlatko Vedral from the University of Oxford’s Department of Physics agreed, while also noting that their experimental results successfully demonstrated Einstein’s equivalence principle’s consistency with quantum mechanics, which alone provides an experimental connection between quantum physics and Einstein’s theory of gravity.
“This experiment pushes quantum mechanics into one of its most intriguing frontiers, gravity, and shows that, once again, its predictions hold,” Professor Vedral explained.
The professor also noted the experiment’s combination of hard experimental data with “a far-reaching theoretical interpretation, about one of the most fundamental questions in physics: How can gravity (described by Einstein’s theory of relativity) and quantum theory be unified into one understanding of the universe?”
The study “Observation of the quantum phase of free fall and the consistency with the equivalence principle” was published in Science Advances.
Christopher Plain has spent the last six years as Associate News Editor and Head Science Reporter at The Debrief. Follow and connect with him on X, learn about his novels at plainfiction.com, or email him at christopher@thedebrief.org.
Physicists at Göttingen University imaged three-dimensional wave functions using a tabletop soft X-ray laser. An electron inside a molecule does not occupy one fixed point. Quantum mechanics instead describes it through a “wavefunction,” a mathematical map that gives the probabilities of properties such as position and momentum. Within molecules, these electron wavefunctions are known as [...]D-Wave is a bit of an oddity in the quantum computing space, having been founded back in the last century. And its initial offering wasn't a quantum computer like those being developed by IBM or Google. Instead, the company built what's now called a quantum annealer, a machine that isn't general-purpose but can solve a large class of optimization problems. While the hardware shares some similarities with the qubits used in gate-based quantum computers, it operates in a fundamentally different way.
But a few years back, D-Wave started working on gate-based hardware, apparently choosing a somewhat unusual qubit technology called fluxonium. And this year, the company acquired a startup called Quantum Circuits that spun out of Yale University and has been developing what's called a dual-rail qubit (the same technology used by Amazon), which promises to make most errors very easy to detect, simplifying error correction.
On Wednesday, the company is publishing a paper in Nature that describes a key step in validating this dual-rail technology, showing that two of the qubits can be entangled without altering their best feature: Most are a single type that is easy to detect.
© D-Wave
Researchers demonstrated that braiding and fusing particles known as non-Abelian anyons can perform every operation required by a quantum computer. A quantum computer becomes broadly useful only when it can perform any computation rather than a limited set of specialized tasks. Physicists have now demonstrated that unusual quantum objects called non-Abelian anyons can provide that [...]
There are many algorithms for which it has been mathematically proven that a quantum computer can generate results that would take a classical computer an unreasonable amount of time to generate. Unfortunately, today's quantum computers either can't run those algorithms or can only run simplified versions that classical computers can also handle. This has left the field facing a challenging question: Can we demonstrate the promise of quantum computers on today's noisy, limited hardware?
That's a more difficult question than it may first appear. If you generate a result that's out of reach of today's regular computers, it may not be possible to verify that you got the right result. And given that today's quantum computers are somewhat error-prone, getting the wrong result is a distinct possibility. Further, in the absence of a mathematical proof of the capabilities of quantum hardware, it's possible that a better classical algorithm could outperform the quantum hardware.
These issues inspired IBM to launch a quantum advantage tracker. On Thursday, the company announced three new entries that it says clearly show a quantum advantage, each using a different approach to overcoming errors and validating quantum results. "Trusted computing when you can do classical simulations is irrelevant," IBM's Jay Gambetta told Ars. "Trusted computing when you can't do classical simulations is a big deal."
© IBM
If you follow quantum computing news for long enough, it can start to seem like any quantum system that can alternate between two well-separated energy states can be used as a qubit. Atoms, ions, photons, electrons, and manufactured devices all have their backers. One of the key things that attracts backers is the tech's ability to scale. We'll need a lot of high-quality qubits to start doing any complex computations, and the ability of any technology to get us there is the subject of debate.
So even as some technologies can now support thousands of qubits, some competitors are still working on a small handful of qubits—the companies behind them are convinced that they have the potential to scale more effectively.
One of those technologies involves quantum dots that hold a single electron. Their advantage is that we can manufacture them using the same tech we use to build traditional processors, an approach that has proven to be scalable. This week saw two new papers describing different ways of using quantum dots, one of which was appealing enough that IBM bought the company that developed it. Separately, another company has released a processor showing 100 individual electrons being held in diamond defects, technology that wasn't obvious could scale.
© HRL Laboratories
“Strange” metals owe at least some of their peculiar properties to the quantum entanglement of their electrons. This finding comes from physicists at the Vienna University of Technology in Austria, who used a concept from quantum information science to guide their experiments. A similar approach, they say, could also yield a better understanding of certain high-temperature superconductors and other correlated quantum materials.
Electrons travel relatively unimpeded through most metals, but in the 1980s, scientists identified puzzling exceptions in certain cuprate high-temperature superconductors. Further examples of this “strange” metal behaviour subsequently turned up in other classes of materials, including heavy-fermion materials, pnictides and organic compounds. This resistive behaviour cannot be explained by theories that treat electrons as independent, non-interacting particles, nor by theories that include interactions while treating electrons as quasiparticles. And although multiple recent theoretical works suggested a possible role for entanglement, experimental evidence was lacking.
To investigate further, a team led by solid-state physicist Silke Bühler-Paschen used facilities at the Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL) in Grenoble, France to perform inelastic neutron scattering measurements on a heavy-fermion metal with the chemical formula Ce3Pd20Si6. According to team member Federico Mazza, who conducted this part of the study, the scattered neutrons would normally each transfer their energy to individual particles.
However, when the researchers analysed their data using a concept called quantum Fisher information – roughly, a measure of how sensitively a quantum state depends on a given parameter – they found that they could not explain what they were seeing in terms of particles behaving independently. Instead, the data indicated that groups of at least nine quantum-entangled entities were acting collectively. Mazza says this provides direct evidence of highly multipartite quantum entanglement in the material – and, in turn, a new way of understanding why strange metals are so strange.
The strange metal state is of great interest because physicists consider it the “parent” state of high-temperature superconductivity, though it also occurs across other materials platforms. “We had suspected that some of the intriguing properties of this state might be related to entanglement but were not able to pin it down until now,” Bühler-Paschen explains. “The results are a great success for us. They confirm that our unusual approach of using methods from quantum information science for solid-state physics studies of novel materials can reveal fundamentally new insight.”
The experiments, which are detailed in Nature Physics, were not without challenges. For starters, the researchers needed to identify an ideal material to study the effect they were looking for and then grow it as a large, high-quality single crystal. Once they secured inelastic neutron scattering beamtime at the ILL’s powerful high-resolution triple-axis spectrometer – a difficult feat in itself – Bühler-Paschen notes that they had to obtain and analyse the data at the highest standards and support it with simulations. “Last but not least, [we had to] communicate with our peers that multipartite entanglement contains valuable information beyond correlation functions and scaling analyses,” Bühler-Paschen recalls.
Rather than being a “detail” of one particular material, Bühler-Paschen says the team’s result suggests that enhanced multipartite entanglement might be an integral part of the strange metal state. Verifying this, however, will require studies on other strange metals across materials classes, she says.
“Looking further ahead, we can envision that this aspect of strange metals finds application in quantum devices,” she tells Physics World. “It could also help us better understand high-temperature superconductors and other materials in which electrons are so strongly correlated that they lose their (quasi)particle nature.”
The post Quantum entanglement explains why strange metals are so strange appeared first on Physics World.
In the event of a nuclear holocaust, the only life remaining on Earth may be cockroaches, Keith Richards and physicists arguing about philosophical interpretations of quantum mechanics. One especially rich source of arguments is a deterministic alternative to the standard Copenhagen interpretation that dates back to the American (and later British, after Princeton University fired him for alleged communist sympathies) theoretical physicist David Bohm. According to Bohm, the position of a quantum particle is well defined everywhere and guided by a “pilot wave” which, alas, cannot be measured directly.
Despite these philosophical differences, Bohmian mechanics makes the same predictions as the Copenhagen interpretation. Except maybe it doesn’t. Occasionally, a bright theorist hypothesizes that, under very specific circumstances, one could distinguish them. Very occasionally, a bright experimentalist conducts an experiment that claims to actually do so.
This is what happened last year when Jan Klärs and colleagues at the University of Twente in the Netherlands sent photons from a laser down one of two coupled waveguides towards a potential step. When the photons reached the step, they could pass through it by quantum tunnelling. They could also pass into the other waveguide. The researchers interpreted the distance the photons travelled through the barrier before tunnelling into the other waveguide as a measurement of their speed.
The key result was that, when the wave functions on both sides of the barrier were the same, the photons still tunnelled at, ahem, light speed – matching the Copenhagen notion that tunnelling occurred equally in both directions. However, the Twente team calculated that Bohmian mechanics predicted that photons inside the step – where the guiding equation didn’t have a real-valued frequency – would be at rest and get stuck. Interferometric measurements showed that wasn’t happening.
Game, set and match to Copenhagen? Er, no. Proponents of Bohmian mechanics immediately disputed the team’s definition of velocity. “It’s just an operational definition,” says Aurélien Drezet of the CNRS University of Grenoble-Alps in France. “It has the units of velocity…but that doesn’t mean that Bohmian mechanics can interpret the result.”
In a “Matters Arising” article in Nature, Drezet and two colleagues at the Technion–Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa now add an experimental qualm. The fact that the Twente team was able to produce an image shows that radiation must be leaking out of the cavity, Drezet claims: “If you go to higher approximations and include cavity losses, you explain the experiment completely using Bohmian mechanics,” he says.
Klärs, who is preparing a formal response, is unconvinced. On the first point, he sees no reason “why the same speed measurement, which correctly captures the Bohmian velocity in the propagating regime, should cease to be a speed measurement in the evanescent regime”. On the second, he says his group did not ignore radiative leakage from the cavity: they measured it and found it “does not have a significant impact on the scattering physics we investigate or on the interpretation of our results”.
This could go on for some time – regardless of how many seconds it is to midnight.
The post Experiment that may or may not disprove Bohmian mechanics continues to spark debate appeared first on Physics World.
ISTA physicists have confirmed a theory proposed 20 years ago that could advance quantum technology. A future quantum computer may need separate modules to behave as one machine, even when they are physically apart. That requires distributed entanglement, a quantum connection between distant components that has typically depended on active control and repeated measurements. Physicists [...]A photon is a single particle of light, and under normal circumstances, it can't be divided. But a photon is also not a particle, in the sense that it does not have a specific location. Instead, it is an extended object.
So if a photon is only partway through the process of reflecting from a perfect mirror and you yank the mirror away, what happens? The answer, from a trio of Norwegian physicists, turns out (arxiv.org link) to be more complex than I expected.
Let’s first talk briefly about dividing and combining photons. If this were a common experience in our lives, then shining a single color of light through a piece of glass or reflecting it from a surface might cause photons to divide or combine. This would lead to an amazing array of colors: Our universe would be the most fantastic and legal LSD trip you could imagine. But this doesn't generally happen, hence LSD.
© DrPixel
Login