Two University of Toronto quantum physicists, Jeff Lundeen and Aephraim Steinberg, say they have shown that Hardy's paradox(1), a proposal that has confounded physicists and science journalists trying to explain it since the 1990s, can be both confirmed and resolved. So take one more quantum problem out of the realm of 'impossible.'
Hardy's Paradox explained (poorly) is that when a positron, antiparticle of an electron, and an electron go through the interferometers (see image below) simultaneusly, the two particles should meet in an "annihilation area" and destroy one another, but Hardy showed something else: quantum theory predicts that both particle and antiparticle could disturb, yet fail to annihilate, each other in the overlapping arms. Why? Because in the quantum world they can be both in and not in the overlapping arms.
"For nearly a century, the widespread interpretation of quantum mechanics suggests that everything is uncertain until it is observed, and that observation inevitably alters reality," says Professor Steinberg. "However, in the 1990s, a technique known as 'interaction-free measurement' seemed to promise the ability to 'see without looking,' as a Scientific American article put it at the time. But when Lucien Hardy proposed that one could never reliably make inferences about past events which hadn't been directly observed, a paradox emerged which suggested that whenever one attempted to reason about the past in this way they would be led into error."
Over the course of nearly two years of work, Steinberg and then-student Jeff Lundeen, now a research associate at the National Research Council of Canada, built a complicated quantum optical experiment and developed new theoretical tools.
Thanks to the multiple existences of particles, they can simultaneously be in and yet not in the overlapping arms. Quantum theory allows an improbable yet entirely possible outcome that makes no sense. This is Hardy's paradox.
In essence, they combined Hardy's Paradox with a new theory known as weak measurement proposed by Tel Aviv University physicist Yakir Aharonov(2), showing that in one sense, one can indeed talk about the past, resolving the paradox. Weak measurement is a tool whereby the presence of a detector is less than the level of uncertainty around what is being measured, so that there is an imperceptible impact on the experiment.
"We found that all of the seemingly paradoxical conclusions in Hardy's Paradox can, in fact, be experimentally verified," says Steinberg, "but that the use of weak measurement removes the contradiction."
"Until recently, it seemed impossible to carry out Hardy's proposal in practice, let alone to confirm or resolve the paradox," he says. "We have finally been able to do so, and to apply Aharonov's methods to the problem, showing that there is a way, even in quantum mechanics, in which one can quite consistently discuss past events even after they are over and done. Weak measurement finds what is there without disturbing it."
Article: J. S. Lundeen, A. M. Steinberg, 'Experimental Joint Weak Measurement on a Photon Pair as a Probe of Hardy's Paradox', Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 020404 (2009) DOI:10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.020404
(1) Boschi, D, S Branca, F de Martini and L Hardy, “Ladder Proof of Nonlocality without Inequalities: Theoretical and Experimental Results”, Physical Review Letters 79, 2755 (1997)
(2) Yakir Aharonov, Alonso Boteroc, Sandu Popescu,Benni Reznika, Jeff Tollaksen, 'Revisiting Hardy's paradox: counterfactual statements, real measurements, entanglement and weak values', Physics Letters A Volume 301, Issues 3-4, 26 August 2002, Pages 130-138, doi:10.1016/S0375-9601(02)00986-6
- PHYSICAL SCIENCES
- EARTH SCIENCES
- LIFE SCIENCES
- SOCIAL SCIENCES
Subscribe to the newsletter
Stay in touch with the scientific world!
Know Science And Want To Write?
- Researchers Created A Laser Bullet To See What It Would Look Like - And Here It Is
- Will Holding Thermal Printer Paper Really Send Your BPA Levels Soaring?
- The Quote Of The Week - Shocked And Disappointed
- As The Weather Changes, So Do Beliefs About Climate Change
- ECFA Workshop: Planning For The High Luminosity LHC
- Great Earthquakes Doubled In The Most Recent 10 Year Period - What That Means
- Limiting Global Warming To 2°C: The Philosophy And The Science
- "I have no time for you. Either learn how to have a decent, mature conversation without resorting..."
- "The past 12 months—October 2013–September 2014—was the warmest 12-month period among all..."
- "Do you really think science20 readers are all so stupid that they are going to fall for Climate..."
- "'Mememine' is a well known astro-turfer for the denial industry. He spams the same identical gish..."
- "I have heard (from someone who worked there) of a laboratory in a country far, far away where they..."
- National Wildlife Refuge System bans on GMOs and neonics lack transparency, scientific rationale
- Want better sperm? Eat more pesticides
- Beyond universal donors, some people are programed with no blood type at all
- Anti-conventional ag movement spurs Big Ag to look to organic pesticides
- Can people really inherit memories?
- An end to fat shaming? The 50 year DNA mystery of metabolic dysfunction may soon be solved
- New policymaking tool for shift to renewable energy
- Teens whose parents exert more psychological control have trouble with closeness, independence
- Two days later: Adolescents' conflicts with family spill over to school, vice versa
- Children in high-quality early childhood education are buffered from changes in family income
- 'Breath test' shows promise for diagnosing fungal pneumonia