Go Back   Science Forums > Science News, Articles, Papers > Science News
Comment
 
LinkBack Article Tools
Published by C1ay 03-13-2007
Work completed by a visiting research professor at Rowan University, physics professors and a student from the institution shows that light is made of particles and waves, a finding that refutes a common belief held for about 80 years.

Shahriar S. Afshar, the visiting professor who is currently at Boston's Institute for Radiation-Induced Mass Studies (IRIMS), led a team, including Rowan physics professors Drs. Eduardo Flores and Ernst Knoesel and student Keith McDonald, that proved Afshar's original claims, which were based on a series of experiments he had conducted several years ago.

An article on the work titled "Paradox in Wave-Particle Duality" recently published in "Foundations of Physics," a prestigious, refereed academic journal, supports Albert Einstein's long-debated belief that quantum physics is incomplete. For eight decades the scientific community generally had supported Niels Bohr's ideas commonly known as the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. In 1927, in his "Principle of Complementarity," he asserted that in any experiment light shows only one aspect at a time, either it behaves as a wave or as a particle. Einstein was deeply troubled by that principle, since he could not accept that any external measurement would prevent light to reveal its full dual nature, according to Afshar. The fundamental problem, however, seemed to be that one has to destroy the photon in order to measure either aspects of it. Then, once destroyed, there is no light left to measure the other aspect.

"About 150 years ago, light was thought to behave solely as a wave similar to sound and water waves. In 1905, Einstein observed that light might also act as being made out of small particles. Since then physicists found it difficult understanding the full nature of light since in some situations it acts like a particle and in others like a wave," Flores said. "This dual nature of light led to the insight that all fundamental physical objects include a wave and a particle aspect, even electrons, protons and students."

Afshar conducted his initial theoretical and experimental work at IRIMS, where he served the privately funded organization as a principal investigator. He later continued his work at the Harvard University Physics Department as a research scholar, where he was able to verify his initial findings before going to Rowan.

In 2004, Afshar claimed that he had devised an experiment that challenged Bohr's principle of complementarity. The Rowan team was formed to verify Afshar's claim at extremely low light intensity levels. Afshar, Flores and Knoesel conducted experiments at Rowan that validated Afshar's initial findings for single photons.

In this modified double-slit experiment, a laser beam hits a screen with two small pinholes. As a particle, light goes through one of the pinholes. Through a lens system, the light is then imaged onto two detectors, where a certain detector measures only the photons, which went through a particular pinhole. In this way, Afshar verified the particle nature of light. As a wave, light goes through both pinholes and forms a so-called interference pattern of bright and dark fringes.

"Afshar's experiment consists of the clever idea of putting small absorbing wires at the exact position of the dark interference fringes, where you expect no light," Knoesel said. "He then observed that the wires do not change the total light intensity, so there are really dark fringes at the position of the wires. That proves that light also behaves as a wave in the same experiment in which it behaves as a particle."

The findings of the Afshar experiment were published online on January 23 in the "Foundations of Physics," an international journal devoted to the conceptual bases and fundamental theories of modern physics, biophysics and cosmology, with several distinguished Nobel laureates on its editorial board. The paper version of the manuscript was published in the February 2007 edition and is now available in libraries throughout the world.

"The important new contribution is that light carries both wave and particle aspects at all times, and future experiments will further clarify the nature of each component." Afshar said.

Flores continued, "It is interesting to note that even after 80 years we can still gain a better understanding about the nature of light using refined measurement techniques and creative ideas and therefore are able add to the vast insights of former scientists."

Source: Rowan University
  #1 (permalink)  
By Boerseun on 03-13-2007
Re: Science team shows light is made of particles and waves

Awesomely interesting! Just goes to show, we're still a long way off, but making headway every single day!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
By Tormod on 03-13-2007
Re: Science team shows light is made of particles and waves

Hm...did the Hypography Politburo (Dept. of Close-Mindedness) actually accept this for publication? Heresy.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
By pgrmdave on 03-13-2007
Re: Science team shows light is made of particles and waves

So...what does that mean, exactly?
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
By Pyrotex on 03-13-2007
Re: Science team shows light is made of particles and waves

No! It is not heresy!

Well, not NOW. Not after the Hypo Quantum Quibbler Team worked so damn hard to "rewire" the underlying structure of the Space-Time Continuum to make this new experiment possible!

Whew! And are we ever exhausted! You ever try to thread quarks on a quantum string? In the dark?

PS: I think this will go down as one of the KEY DEFINING EXPERIMENTS of the 21st Century! No kidding. I believe we are about to blow our understanding of the quantum realm wide freakin open.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
By Tormod on 03-13-2007
Re: Science team shows light is made of particles and waves

Quote:
Originally Posted by pgrmdave View Post
So...what does that mean, exactly?
I mean, seriously, don't we have a hidden agenda to *not* publish anything that a) says something else than MAINSTREAM SCIENCE (ie the TRUTH) and b) tries to look at things from a NEW PERSPECTIVE???

What's the world coming to.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
By CraigD on 03-13-2007
Thumbs down I don't think these experiments are significant

There’s a clear description of Afshar’s experiment at this wikipedia section.

My first impression upon reading the hypography article and this Rowan University article was that there was either something wrong with Afshar’s experimental conclusions, or with everything I understood about decoherence, with a strong leaning to former.

After reading a more detailed description at wikipedia, and Afshar, Flores, McDonald, and Knoesel’s Foundation of Physics paper (Note that the actual apparatus described in these two descriptions differ substantially, but are, I think, equivalent), I’m convinced that Afshar’s experiment, both the 2001 high-intensity light and the 2004 low-intensity, single photon one, do not challenge complementarity, because they do not actually capture “which way” information for individual photons, but only detector counts of on the order of 10^4 photons – that AFMK call “the integrated flux image”. It is not possible from this data to give a photon-by-photon, left/right account (eg: “LRRLRLLRRRLRRLRLL …(10^4+ characters)… LLRRL”) more accurate than one based on an accurate count of the total number of photons emitted and that number of coin tosses. Were the experiment repeated, and the data necessary for such an account recorded, I believe the interference pattern would disappear (the number of photons counted at the detectors be reduced), as has been demonstrated in various “quantum eraser” experiments performed in the past few decades, such as [quant-ph/9903047] A Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser. My opinion appears to be shared by some of the critics cited in the wikipedia article.

I’m at a loss (and restrained by politeness) to explain why apparently educated physicists such as AFMK would not arrive at a similar objection to their offered interpretation, but nonetheless, don’t think these experiments are scientifically significant.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
By CraigD on 03-13-2007
Post What it means, briefly

Quote:
Originally Posted by pgrmdave View Post
So...what does that mean, exactly?
Briefly put, quantum physics predicts that
  • Even if only a single photon is present within the apparatus at any time, light directed through a blocking device with 2 properly sized and spaced slits will produce an interference pattern of light and dark bands on a detector, such as photographic film, placed behind it.
  • Detecting with certainty which of the 2 slits each photon passes through (including by the simple method of blocking one slit) will cause the pattern to disappear
Afshar et. all claim to have violated the second of these predictions. If this is so, it could have far-reaching implications.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
By Pyrotex on 03-13-2007
Re: What it means, briefly

Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigD View Post
...Afshar et. all claim to have violated the second of these predictions. If this is so, it could have far-reaching implications.
I smell Nobel Prize.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
By KickAssClown on 03-13-2007
Re: What it means, briefly

Doesn't suprise me at all.

As I have placed as objection in the past, why must I accept that the photon, electron, etc went through the slit at all?

Ah, convient fictions. How scientist love them, and forget to note them.

I hope to hear about repeated experiments soon by other scientific groups. Maybe then we can make some headway into the relative-quantum realm.
Reply With Quote
Comment

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Article: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Article Tools


Similar Threads
Article Article Starter Category Comments Last Post
electrons, particles, waves... cnfsdnlostinside Spanish forum 8 05-09-2008 05:11 AM
Light and Gravitational Waves with the Progress of Einstein’s Ideas HIENVN Astronomy and Cosmology 3 03-14-2007 05:07 PM
Propeties of light waves Drosera Physics and Mathematics 6 12-12-2005 05:19 PM
Particles can travel faster than light! Jay-qu Physics and Mathematics 33 09-30-2005 04:20 AM
Optical computer made from frozen light C1ay Science News 0 04-13-2005 06:51 AM

» Advertisement
» Current Poll
Who's the sexiest man alive? Johnny Depp or Robert Pattinson?
Johnny Depp - 27.27%
3 Votes
Robert Pattinson - 0%
0 Votes
Someone else (please specify) - 45.45%
5 Votes
I'm too macho to think a guy is sexy - 27.27%
3 Votes
Total Votes: 11
You may not vote on this poll.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:42 PM.

Hypography?

Hypography [n.]: A combination of "hyperlink" and "bibliography" - ie, a list of links to electronic documents. Comparable to discography and bibliography, but not cartography.

We have been online since May 2000, and aim to be the best place to find and share science-related content of all kinds.

Share the love!

Please add more science to your life. Use our RSS feeds on your blog, your portal, or your favorite feedreader!


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.3.2
Copyright © 2000-2009 Hypography
Part of the Hypography - Science for Everyone Network
Powered by GARS © 2005-2008