Quick Navigation
Topics
Open Quantum Systems Decoherence
Significant nonclassical paths with atoms and cavities in the double-slit experiment
arXiv
Authors: J. O. de Almeida, M. Lewenstein, J. Q. Quach
Year
2020
Paper ID
22331
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
120
Citations
N/A
Abstract
In the the double-slit experiment, nonclassical paths are Feynman paths that go through both slits. Prior work with atom cavities as which-way detectors in the double-slit experiment has shown these paths to be experimentally inaccessible. In this paper, we show how such a setup can indeed detect nonclassical paths with 1% probability if one considers a different type of nonclassical path than previously investigated. We also show how this setup can be used to erase and restore the coherence of the nonclassical paths. Finally, we also show how atom cavities may be used to implement a exact measure of Born-rule violation [Quach, Which-way double-slit experiments and Born-rule violation, Phys. Rev. A 95, 042129 (2017)], which up until now has only been a formal construct.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Open Quantum Systems & Decoherence research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2020 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- In the the double-slit experiment, nonclassical paths are Feynman paths that go through both slits.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.