Quick Navigation
Topics
Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations
Concerning Quadratic Interaction in the Quantum Cheshire Cat Experiment
arXiv
Authors: W. M. Stuckey, Michael Silberstein, Timothy McDevitt
Year
2014
Paper ID
47150
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
187
Citations
N/A
Abstract
In a July 2014 Nature Communications paper, Denkmayr et al. claim to have instantiated the so-called quantum Cheshire Cat experiment using neutron interferometry. Crucial to this claim are the weak values which must imply the quantum Cheshire Cat interpretation, i.e., "the neutron and its spin are spatially separated" in their experiment. While they measured the correct weak values for the quantum Cheshire Cat interpretation, the corresponding implications do not obtain because, as we show, those weak values were measured with both a quadratic and a linear magnetic field Bz interaction. We show explicitly how those weak values imply quantum Cheshire Cat if the Bz interaction is linear and then we show how the quadratic Bz interaction destroys the quantum Cheshire Cat implications of those weak values. Since both linear and quadratic Bz interactions contribute equally to the neutron intensity in this experiment, the deviant weak value implications are unavoidable. Because weak values were used successfully to compute neutron intensities for weak Bz in this experiment, it is clearly the case that one cannot make ontological inferences from weak values without taking into account the corresponding interaction strength.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Entanglement Theory & Quantum Correlations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2014 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- In a July 2014 Nature Communications paper, Denkmayr et al.
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.