JQIS  Vol.2 No.2 , June 2012
Modified Two-Slit Experiments and Complementarity
Abstract: Some modified two-slit interference experiments claim to demonstrate a violation of Bohr’s complementarity principle. A typical such experiment is theoretically analyzed using wave-packet dynamics. The flaw in the analysis of such experiments is pointed out and it is demonstrated that they do not violate complementarity. In addition, it is quite generally proved that if the state of a particle is such that the modulus square of the wave-function yields an interference pattern, then it necessarily loses which-path information.
Cite this paper: T. Qureshi, "Modified Two-Slit Experiments and Complementarity," Journal of Quantum Information Science, Vol. 2 No. 2, 2012, pp. 35-40. doi: 10.4236/jqis.2012.22007.

[1]   N. Bohr, “Albert Einstein Philosopher-Scientist,” 3rd Edition, Open Court, Evanston, 1949.

[2]   M. O. Scully and K. Druhl, “Quantum Eraser: A Proposed Photon Correlation Experiment Concerning Observation and Delayed Choice in Quantum Mechanics,” Physical Review A, Vol. 25, No. 4, 1982, pp. 2208-2213. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.25.2208

[3]   M. O. Scully, B.-G. Englert and H. Walther, “Quantum Optical Tests of Complementarity,” Nature, Vol. 351, 1991, pp. 111-116. doi:10.1038/351111a0

[4]   M. Chown, “Quantum Rebel,” New Scientist, Vol. 183, No. 2457, 2004, pp. 30-35.

[5]   S. S. Afshar, “Violation of the Principle of Complementariry and Its Implications,” Proceedings of SPIE, Vol. 5866, 2005, pp. 229-244. doi:10.1117/12.638774

[6]   S. S. Afshar, E. Flores, K. F. McDonald and E. Knoesel, “Paradox in Wave-Particle Duality,” Foundations of Physics, Vol. 37, No. 2, 2007, pp. 295-305. doi:10.1007/s10701-006-9102-8

[7]   P. G. Kwiat, H. Weinfurter, T. Herzog, A. Zeilinger and M. A. Kasevich, “Interaction-Free Measurement,” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 74, No. 24, 1995, pp. 4763-4766. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.4763

[8]   W. Unruh, “Shahriar Afshar—Quantum Rebel?” 2004.

[9]   R. E. Kastner, “Why the Afshar Experiment Does Not Refute Complementarity,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B, Vol. 36, No. 4, 2005, pp. 649-658. doi:10.1016/j.shpsb.2005.04.006

[10]   R. E. Kastner, “On Visibility in the Afshar Two-Slit Experiment,” Foundations of Physics, Vol. 39, No. 10, 2009, pp. 1139-1144. doi:10.1007/s10701-009-9329-2

[11]   T. Qureshi, “Comment on ‘On Visibility in the Afshar Two-Slit Experiment’,” arXiv:1002.3686v1 [quant-ph], 2010.

[12]   R. Srinivasan, “Logical Analysis of the Bohr Complementarity Principle in Afshar’s Experiment under the NAFL Interpretation,” International Journal of Quantum Information, Vol. 8, No. 3, 2010, pp. 465-491. doi:10.1142/S021974991000640X

[13]   V. Jacques, N. D. Lai, A. Drau, D. Zheng, D. Chauvat, F. Treussart, P. Grangier and J-F. Roch, “Illustration of Quantum Complementarity Using Single Photons Interfering on a Grating,” New Journal of Physics, Vol. 10, No. 10, 2008, Article ID: 123009. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/10/12/123009

[14]   A. Drezet, “Complementarity and Afshar’s Experiment,” 2005.

[15]   O. Steuernagel, “Afshar’s Experiment Does Not Show a Violation of Complementarity,” Foundations of Physics, Vol. 37, No. 9, 2007, pp. 1370-1385. doi:10.1007/s10701-007-9153-5

[16]   P. O’Hara, “Entanglement and Quantum Interference,” 2006.

[17]   S. Durr, T. Nonn and G. Rempe, “Origin of Quantum-Mechanical Complementarity Probed by a ‘Which-Way’ Experiment in an Atom Interferometer,” Nature, Vol. 395, 1998, pp. 33-37. doi:10.1038/25653