Interference

[J.C.MacSwell]

Does light of equal frequency interfere as originally thought or is it the individual photons primarily "interfering with themselves"?

 

Or do we know?

[Johnny5]

Does light of equal frequency interfere as originally thought or is it the individual photons primarily "interfering with themselves"?

 

Or do we know?

 

What do you mean "interfere as originally thought"?

 

Wave superposition

[The Rebel]

Are you refering to Young's two slit interference experiment alongside the principles of superposition?

 

I can only really look at this in terms of thinking of two speakers punching out sound waves. A compression of air + a compression of air would equal a greater compression of air and vice versa.

 

I find it difficult to imagine how light "cancels" out though.

 

Another interesting comparison with sound is "Beating". If you plot a sine wave for a red wave and a green wave you get beats with the frequency of a yellow wave.

[J.C.MacSwell]

What do you mean "interfere as originally thought"?

 

Wave superposition

 

I think they originally figured that the photons interfered with each other and not with themselves in the two slit experiment etc. I think it was the Aspect experiments that proved that photons sent one at a time would (eventually) create an interference pattern.

[ydoaPs]

well, that gives your answer. one at a time produces interference, they interfere with themselves.

 

site note: for light, is the probablility wave for a photon the same wave as the em wave?

[J.C.MacSwell]

site note: for light, is the probablility wave for a photon the same wave as the em wave?

 

Are they not the same thing?

[J.C.MacSwell]

.

 

site note: for light' date=' is the probablility wave for a photon the same wave as the em wave?[/quote']

 

OK, this is a "blurt" so someone correct me who knows better (or confirm it on the off chance that I am right):

 

Photons of different frequencies have different probability waves. Higher frequencies can be used to more accurately probe the positions of particles, with greater uncertainty about their velocity than lower frequencies.

[J.C.MacSwell]

well' date=' that gives your answer. one at a time produces interference, they interfere with themselves.

 

?[/quote']

 

Now send them billions at a time. Is the primary interference "self interference" or otherwise?

[blike]

Good question, I've been wondering the same thing.

[swansont]

Now send them billions at a time. Is the primary[/b'] interference "self interference" or otherwise?

 

Does it matter?

 

I think the lesson of self-interference in the double-slit experiment is that while you can think of it as a photon when you create it and when it interacts with the detection screen, you still have to think of it as a wave if you stick a wave-like measurement in its path.

[swansont]

OK' date=' this is a "blurt" so someone correct me who knows better (or confirm it on the off chance that I am right):

 

Photons of different frequencies have different probability waves. Higher frequencies can be used to more accurately probe the positions of particles, with greater uncertainty about their velocity than lower frequencies.[/quote']

 

Greater uncertainty about whose velocity? Photons travel at c, so there is really no uncertainty about their velocity.

 

If you mean the uncertainty of the target, that'll be tru regardless of the photon properties. If you know the position better, you have more uncertainty in the velocity. The reason you get better position information is that the light is more localized and there is less "smearing" from diffraction.

[J.C.MacSwell]

Does it matter?

 

I think the lesson of self-interference in the double-slit experiment is that while you can think of it as a photon when you create it and when it interacts with the detection screen' date=' you still have to think of it as a wave if you stick a wave-like measurement in its path.[/quote']

 

I think it would matter if there was a verifiable difference.

 

Apparently there is not (no known difference)?

[J.C.MacSwell]

Greater uncertainty about whose velocity? Photons travel at c' date=' so there is really no uncertainty about their velocity.

 

If you mean the uncertainty of the target, that'll be tru regardless of the photon properties. If you know the position better, you have more uncertainty in the velocity. The reason you get better position information is that the light is more localized and there is less "smearing" from diffraction.[/quote']

 

Uncertainty of the target particle.

 

Edit: So you get less "smearing" and higher precision for position with a higher frequency/energy photon. Would you therefore get less precision for velocity? (for the targetparticle of course)