Researchers demonstrate 'quantum surrealism'

February 19, 2016

New research demonstrates that particles at the quantum level can in fact be seen as behaving something like billiard balls rolling along a table, and not merely as the probabilistic smears that the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics suggests. But there's a catch - the tracks the particles follow do not always behave as one would expect from "realistic" trajectories, but often in a fashion that has been termed "surrealistic."

In a new version of an old experiment, CIFAR Senior Fellow Aephraim Steinberg (University of Toronto) and colleagues tracked the of photons as the particles traced a path through one of two slits and onto a screen. But the researchers went further, and observed the "nonlocal" influence of another photon that the first photon had been entangled with.

The results counter a long-standing criticism of an interpretation of quantum mechanics called the De Broglie-Bohm theory. Detractors of this interpretation had faulted it for failing to explain the behaviour of realistically. For Steinberg, the results are important because they give us a way of visualizing quantum mechanics that's just as valid as the standard interpretation, and perhaps more intuitive.

"I'm less interested in focusing on the philosophical question of what's 'really' out there. I think the fruitful question is more down to earth. Rather than thinking about different metaphysical interpretations, I would phrase it in terms of having different pictures. Different pictures can be useful. They can help shape better intuitions."

At stake is what is "really" happening at the . The uncertainty principle tells us that we can never know both a particle's position and momentum with complete certainty. And when we do interact with a quantum system, for instance by measuring it, we disturb the system. So if we fire a photon at a screen and want to know where it will hit, we'll never know for sure exactly where it will hit or what path it will take to get there.

The standard interpretation of quantum mechanics holds that this uncertainty means that there is no "real" trajectory between the light source and the screen. The best we can do is to calculate a "wave function" that shows the odds of the photon being in any one place at any time, but won't tell us where it is until we make a measurement.

Yet another interpretation, called the De Broglie-Bohm theory, says that the photons do have real trajectories that are guided by a "pilot wave" that accompanies the particle. The wave is still probabilistic, but the particle takes a real trajectory from source to target. It doesn't simply "collapse" into a particular location once it's measured.

In 2011 Steinberg and his colleagues showed that they could follow trajectories for photons by subjecting many identical particles to measurements so weak that the particles were barely disturbed, and then averaging out the information. This method showed trajectories that looked similar to classical ones - say, those of balls flying through the air.

But critics had pointed out a problem with this viewpoint. Quantum mechanics also tells us that two particles can be entangled, so that a measurement of one particle affects the other. The critics complained that in some cases, a measurement of one particle would lead to an incorrect prediction of the trajectory of the entangled particle. They coined the term "surreal trajectories" to describe them.

In the most recent experiment, Steinberg and colleagues showed that the surrealism was a consequence of non-locality - the fact that the particles were able to influence one another instantaneously at a distance. In fact, the "incorrect" predictions of trajectories by the entangled photon were actually a consequence of where in their course the were measured. Considering both together, the measurements made sense and were consistent with real trajectories.

Steinberg points out that both the standard interpretation of and the De Broglie-Bohm interpretation are consistent with experimental evidence, and are mathematically equivalent. But it is helpful in some circumstances to visualize real trajectories, rather than wave function collapses, he says.

Explore further: Quantum physics first: Researchers observe single photons in two-slit interferometer experiment

More information: Experimental Nonlocal and Surreal Bohmian Trajectories, Science Advances, advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/2/e1501466

Related Stories

Fluid mechanics suggests alternative to quantum orthodoxy

September 12, 2014

The central mystery of quantum mechanics is that small chunks of matter sometimes seem to behave like particles, sometimes like waves. For most of the past century, the prevailing explanation of this conundrum has been what's ...

A little light interaction leaves quantum physicists beaming

August 24, 2015

A team of physicists at the University of Toronto (U of T) have taken a step toward making the essential building block of quantum computers out of pure light. Their advance, described in a paper published this week in Nature ...

Recommended for you

High-precision magnetic field sensing

December 2, 2016

Scientists have developed a highly sensitive sensor to detect tiny changes in strong magnetic fields. The sensor may find widespread use in medicine and other areas.

10 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

promile
Feb 20, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
promile
Feb 20, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
promile
Feb 20, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
promile
Feb 20, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whydening Gyre
3.7 / 5 (3) Feb 21, 2016
Promile (Zeph).
Why are you the only one to make comment here?
MickLinux
1 / 5 (1) Feb 21, 2016
If you have two space dimensions and two time dimensions, the cross product yields a third dimension of space (and maybe time). However, six spacetime dimensions is overdefined; in fact, all combinations are overdefined or underdefined except 3 and 1. Therefore, in the macroscopic world we live in, the time flows together, and there are three space.

Transition to the electron shell, where only one space dimension -- distance from the nucleus -- is important. Now, 3:1 yields one space, three time.

So quantum mechanics may need to be interpreted in terms of time-based orbitals. In that case, quantum entanglement has to do with interactions in t-space.
promile
Feb 22, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
promile
Feb 22, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
promile
Feb 22, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whydening Gyre
1 / 5 (1) Feb 22, 2016
I personally, find you mostly understandable, despite what seems a mild language barrier. As an artist (meaning-insufficiently trained in the deep mathematic arts), I find your explanations rather cogent and well thought out. That doesn't necessarily mean I always agree with your postulations, but at least they seem to provide a solid basis for further discussion. Not sure why others are so ardent in their denial of your input.
That said, I think your input has made clear many conceptual paradigms. To me, at least...

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.