• 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.


PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

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


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,075 questions , 2,226 unanswered
5,347 answers , 22,743 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
818 active unimported users
More ...

  Clarification about the Brown & Twiss experiment setting

+ 1 like - 0 dislike

Based on "Optical coherence and quantum optics" by Leonard Mandel & Wolf, page 458:

it is said that one of the photo-multipliers (P2) was "mounted on a horizontal slide which could be traversed in a direction normal to the direction pf propagation of the incident light. thus the cathode apertures, as viewed from the pinhole, could be superimposed or separated ".

up to this point, it makes sense. later on, though, it is said that "the normalized correlation coefficient C(d) of the photo-current fluctuations was measured as a function of the effective separation d=|r1-r2| between the photo-cathodes"

this inconsistency (to my understanding) makes me a little confused. how is the motion of P2 on an axis normal to the direction of propagation of the incident light equivalent to the change in the effective separation d?

thanks in advance for anyone who would take the time and help me resolve the puzzle!

asked May 7, 2019 in Experimental Physics by anonymous [ revision history ]
edited May 7, 2019

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:
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).
Please complete the anti-spam verification

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

Your rights