Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

Please welcome our new moderators!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

122 submissions , 103 unreviewed
3,497 questions , 1,172 unanswered
4,543 answers , 19,337 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
407 active unimported users
More ...

Quantum superposition of states: experimental verification

+ 2 like - 0 dislike
59 views

How can somebody demonstrate the quantum superposition of states directly by other means than the double slit experiment?

And why can't macroscopic objects like a pen be in superpostion of states? Will it ever be possible to have an object like a pen to be in superposition of more than one state?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user user774025
asked Jan 10, 2013 in Experimental Physics by user774025 (165 points) [ no revision ]
Others have given good answers, but it all depends on what you mean by "directly." You simply can't "see" a wavefunction. There are many experiments showing quantum superpositions, but they all rely to some degree on interference since that is how you measure the relative phase of different components of the wavefunction.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user Michael Brown
Related: Can all quantum superpositions be realized experimentally?.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user Emilio Pisanty
So, the reason why macroscopic objects like pen can't be in superposition of different because of decoherence. But will it be ever possible to "remove" decoherence and demonstrate the quantum of superposition of large objects?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user user774025

5 Answers

+ 3 like - 0 dislike

This reference describes an experiment in which an ion is prepared in a superposition state for which the relative phase between the component states is controllable, and ulimately measurable.

The obstruction to having objects like pens in superposition states is the inability to isolate its parts from the environment. Interactions between the environment and the system (the atoms in the pen) act through a process called decoherence, which has the effect of suppressing these relative phase terms incredibly quickly.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user twistor59
answered Jan 11, 2013 by twistor59 (2,490 points) [ no revision ]
+ 2 like - 0 dislike

There are experiments with cold atom gases in optical traps that deal with matter's essential quantum nature. Cold atom gases' is actually quite a hot field (no pun intended). In an attempt to answer your question, I will try to explain how I understand quantum superposition experiments work in the most general possible way I can.

A superposition state $\left|\Psi\right\rangle$, under this most general description possible, is a linear superposition (that is precisely the reason why they are called that way) of the different quantum states that the system may have: $$\left|\Psi\right\rangle=\sum_i c_i\left|\tilde{\Psi}_i\right\rangle$$ Where the sum is performed over all possible $\left|\tilde{\Psi}_i\right\rangle$ states in the chosen basis, each one of them weighed by a complex factor $c_i$. The common idea in every experiment dealing with quantum superposition is simple: to have a system whose initial state, which is given by the $c_i$'s, can be prepared and controlled (that is called a coherent state), and in which a certain observable quantity can be measured (associated with an operator branded $\hat{A}$). At the end of the day, the result of every observable measurement can be understood in terms of how the operator $\hat{A}$ acts over the different states in the basis, how each one of these states in the particular basis of choice evolve in time and which are the weights $c_i$.

What happens in the double slit experiment, trying to explain it in these terms without delving into further details, is that the different time evolutions of the (initially coherent) electrons moving through the experimental setup introduce phase factors that keep adding up to the $c_i$'s. When the position of the electrons is recorded on a screen (which constitutes the measurement), the mean value of the position observable has these different phase factors interfering with each other, giving rise to an interference pattern in the screen as a result.

The key idea in these experiments is always the following: To start with a coherent state (or at least as coherent as it can be managed in practice), to let interactions and time evolution make their respective jobs, and later on to see what happens when the system is looked at.

What happens with a macroscopic system? The abridged answer is: 'Way too many things'. For starters, the number of components would be of the order of $N_A=6'022\cdot10^{23}$ when not greater, so the number of states in our basis for a complete, many-body description would be absolutely humongous. On top of that, atoms and electrons are subject to many interactions on a microscopic level, so any coherence that may be momentaneously achieved will be destroyed in a quick, uncontrolled way before any measurement may be performed...

... Unless what we are dealing with is a system of a very particular kind, either with not too many particles (cold atom gases) or some specific interaction which favours the appearance of a coherent state even on a $N_A$-level macroscopic scale (as in conventional superconductivity and superfluidity).

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user user17581
answered Jan 11, 2013 by user17581 (20 points) [ no revision ]
+ 2 like - 0 dislike

Observation of a kilogram-scale oscillator near its quantum ground state Abbott, B. et al.

http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/32707/1/ID32707.pdf

Quantum Upsizing Aspelmeyer, Schwab, Zeilinger.

http://fqxi.org/data/articles/Schwab_Asp_Zeil.pdf

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user user12103
answered May 23, 2013 by user12103 (150 points) [ no revision ]
+ 1 like - 0 dislike

In my opinion, the concept behind the famous Schroedinger's cat is exactly this: to Schroedinger, it appeared paradoxical that a macroscopic object -- even a living being -- could be in a superposition of states. However, cases in which the radiation inside a cavity was prepared in a superposition of two macroscopically distinguishable states have already been observed experimentally. For example, this was one of the result for which the Nobel Prize this year was awarded, see here. In the case cited, decoherence was also observed. Even better: it was observed a slow, gradual process of decoherence.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user Bzazz
answered Jan 12, 2013 by Bzazz (10 points) [ no revision ]
+ 1 like - 0 dislike

Others have covered the usual microscopic systems that are currently amenable to controlled quantum manipulations, but there are in fact "macroscopic" objects (to some definitions of the word) that can be placed in quantum superpositions. These fall broadly within a field known usually as cavity optomechanics, which has a reasonable wikipedia page. The essential idea is to couple the oscillations of light to those of one of the mirrors of a cavity; this allows 'quantumness' in the state of the light to translate into the state of the mirror.

In this and usually all macroscopic examples, it is only one degree of freedom - the centre-of-mass position in this case - that gets put in a superposition; all other degrees of freedom are left in classical, often thermal, states. This is nevertheless quite enough to get quantum behaviour. For example, you can obtain double-slit interference patterns using buckyballs (C$_{60}$) using their centre-of-mass positions, while maintaining the rotational and vibrational degrees of freedom (which are merely a better way of accounting for all motional degrees of freedom apart from the average) in (fairly cold) thermal, classical states.

Another quantum superposition of a macroscopic object - (just) visible to the naked eye! - is the placing of a microwave oscillator in a superposition state using other microwave sources en lieu of laser beams on an atom. This is fairly well explained by Aaron O'Connell in his TED talk. For more formal references try the UCSB Cleland group page; good popular science articles are listed in O'Connell's wikipedia page.

Finally, I would try macroscopic quantum phenomena" in wikipedia.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user Emilio Pisanty
answered Jan 12, 2013 by Emilio Pisanty (330 points) [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar$ysicsOverfl$\varnothing$w
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...