Illustrated Physics
physics, drawn
Concept

Decoherence — where it appears

The loss of a definite phase relation between parts of a superposition, which removes interference without needing any measurement to have happened. It happens whenever a system entangles with an environment it cannot track, and it happens faster the larger the system is.

Named by 14 essays across 3 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

An electron's wavelength against the voltage that accelerated it. The de Broglie wavelength of an electron after falling through a potential difference, in picometres. At 100 volts it is 122.6 picometres, at 400 volts it is 61.3 picometres, at 900 volts it is 40.9 picometres. The wavelength goes as the inverse square root of the voltage, so quadrupling the voltage halves it. The calculation is non-relativistic; at a kilovolt that costs a tenth of a per cent. The dashed line is the 215 picometre spacing between atomic planes in nickel, which is what makes an electron beam diffract off a crystal at all.

Everything has a wavelength, and almost nothing shows it

If light with a momentum can behave like a particle, a particle with a momentum can behave like a wave. The wavelength is Planck's constant over the momentum, which for anything larger than a molecule is a number too small to have consequences.

quantum · Matter waves The interference pattern arriving one particle at a time. The same double slit — 100 micrometres apart, slits 40 micrometres wide, lit at 633 nm, screen 1 metre away — recorded after 20, 200, 1000 arrivals, with the intensity that governs them plotted underneath. Each arrival is a single dot in one place, drawn at a position sampled from that intensity. After 20 there is no pattern to see; after 1000 the fringes are unmistakable, with the dark ones exactly 6.33 millimetres apart — the wavelength times the screen distance over the separation. The bright ones are not evenly spaced, because the single-slit envelope pulls each maximum toward the centre; its first zero is at 15.8 millimetres and is set by the width of one slit alone.

One arrival at a time, and the pattern still appears

Send particles through a double slit slowly enough that only one is ever in the apparatus, and each arrives as a single dot in one place. Wait, and the dots assemble into fringes that no dot knew about.

quantum · Matter waves Where the particle is likely to be found. A particle confined between two walls one unit apart. States 1, 4, 16 are drawn, each riding on a line at its own energy — 1E₁, 16E₁, 256E₁ — because the energies go as n². The curves are |ψ|², the probability of finding the particle at each position. The dashed line on each is the classical answer: a ball bouncing between the walls at constant speed is equally likely to be anywhere, and the quantum density oscillates about it and converges onto it as n rises.

Where the quantum picture hands back the old one

A confined particle's probability density oscillates violently at every quantum number, and never stops. What makes the classical answer come back is not that the oscillations die away — it is that nothing can resolve them.

quantum · Correspondence The correlation, and the best a shared list of answers can do. The coincidence correlation between two polarisation analysers against the angle between them, over two full turns of the correlation — a polariser turned through 180° is the same polariser, so the picture repeats. The singlet gives −cos 2Δ, drawn through −1.00 at 0°, 1.00 at 90°, −1.00 at 180°, 1.00 at 270°. Beside it is the best correlation any shared list of pre-agreed answers can produce: straight lines between the same four extremes, with corners where the cosine is smooth. The two agree exactly at the multiples of 45° and nowhere else, and they are furthest apart — by 0.2105 — at 19.77° and 70.23°, which is ½ arcsin(2/π) from either end of the quarter turn. The difference is not a matter of degree: it is a curve against a shape with a corner in it, and no list can be bent into the curve.

The correlation no instructions can produce

A pair of gloves in two boxes agrees perfectly and needs no physics, because the answers were settled at packing. What no packing can imitate is the shape that appears as the two analysers are turned relative to each other, and the shape is a number — 2.828 where every list of pre-agreed answers is stuck at 2.

quantum · Entanglement How far apart the two paths can be. Fringe visibility against the difference between the two path lengths, for light at 550 nm with a bandwidth of 100 nm. Each curve is the modulus of the Fourier transform of its own line shape, summed over the spectrum here rather than taken from a standard result, and the three shapes have the same width at half height. The conventional coherence length λ²/Δλ is 3.02 µm for this light, and what the curves show is that the convention is a rounding of three genuinely different behaviours: a flat band halves at 1.83 µm, a Gaussian line halves at 1.33 µm, a Lorentzian line halves at 0.68 µm. The flat band comes back — a rectangle's transform rings — and the Lorentzian's tails keep a little visibility very much further out than its width suggests. Nothing here is about the apparatus: the fade is the source forgetting its own phase.

How far a wave can remember

Split a beam, delay one half, and put them back together. The fringes are bright while the delay is short and fade as it grows, and the distance at which they die is fixed by nothing but the width of the source's spectral line. Watching them fade is reading the line shape.

optics · Coherence What is lost is exactly what is recorded. Fringe visibility against the distinguishability of the record left in the environment, for six couplings between the interferometer and a marker. The points lie on the quarter circle V² + D² = 1, computed here to a part in 10¹² — the visibility from the output probabilities with the marker traced out, and the distinguishability from the overlap of the marker's two states, with nothing shared between the two calculations. The relation is the quantitative form of complementarity, and it is stronger than the usual statement: interference is not lost because something was disturbed, and not lost only when a measurement is made. It is lost exactly to the extent that the environment could in principle say which way the particle went, whether or not anybody looks at the environment. That is why decoherence is a matter of correlation rather than of disturbance: the coherence has not been destroyed but relocated, into a correlation between the particle and something else.

Where the interference goes

A superposition does not stop being a superposition when something interacts with it. What happens is that the coherence moves — out of the system and into a correlation between the system and its surroundings — and the interference disappears from any measurement made on the system alone. For a dust grain in air the move takes 10⁻²⁸ seconds, which is why nothing large has ever been seen in two places.

quantum · Measurement An average that follows Newton's law exactly. The centre of a wavepacket in a harmonic well, and the classical orbit started from the same place, drawn on top of each other. They agree to 5.5e-6 over 2.2 periods, which is the split-step integrator's own error and not a physical gap. This is exact and it is exact for every state of a harmonic oscillator, however wide, however lumpy, however far from classical: the theorem needs ⟨−V′(x)⟩ = −V′(⟨x⟩), which for a linear restoring force is true term by term. It is worth being suspicious of how strong that looks. The harmonic oscillator is the one potential where the average force over a state and the force at the state's centre cannot differ, so it is the worst possible example from which to conclude that quantum averages follow classical paths.

The average that obeys Newton

Ehrenfest's theorem says the centre of a wavepacket moves according to the average force over the state. That is exact, it is often quoted as the reason classical mechanics survives, and the two statements are not the same — because the average of a force is the force at the average only when the force is linear, which is to say almost never.

quantum · Correspondence A quasi-probability that goes negative. The Wigner function of the oscillator's state at a quarter of its revival time, with 4 quanta on average: two copies of the packet, at x = ±2.83, in equal superposition. It is computed from the wavefunction by the Wigner transform on a lattice, and it integrates to one. The two copies are the two positive blobs. Between them lies a pattern of stripes with no classical counterpart, running from 0.289 down to −0.289, where the shaded warm regions and their outlines mark negative values. A negative probability is not a probability, so this distribution cannot describe a cloud of classical particles. The stripes are also taller than the blobs, so the interference carries more structure than the copies themselves: the highest stripe reaches 0.289 and the centre of a blob 0.159.

The probability that goes below zero

Classical mechanics describes an uncertain state as a cloud of points in the plane of position and momentum. Quantum mechanics has an exact counterpart, the Wigner function, whose shadows are the true position and momentum distributions — and which goes negative. It goes negative for a single photon, for every superposition of two packets, and for every pure state that is not a Gaussian. Where it is negative no classical cloud can imitate the state, and losing energy to the surroundings erases the negative regions first.

quantum · Correspondence Four outcomes, one of which happened. The correlation between the two outer particles' measurements, against the angle between their analysers, for each of the four results the middle measurement can give. Every one of the four leaves the outer pair maximally entangled — each curve reaches one and minus one — so every outcome is as good as any other, and the outer parties have a perfect Bell pair whichever it was. What differs is which correlation they have, and the four are shifted and reflected versions of each other. The flat line is their average, which is zero at every angle, checked here at seven hundred and twenty angles to twelve figures. That vanishing is the whole reason the operation cannot be used to send anything: until the middle party's two classical bits arrive by an ordinary channel, the outer parties' data is indistinguishable from noise, and no correlation appears at all. The entanglement is created instantly and is useless until a message travelling no faster than light says which of the four it is.

A link between two that never met

Take two entangled pairs sharing no particle, measure the two inner particles jointly, and the two outer ones — which have never interacted, never been in the same place, and have no history in common — are entangled. Nothing travelled between them. What has to travel is two classical bits saying which of four results occurred, and until those arrive the outer parties see nothing at all.

quantum · Entanglement How much a block knows about the rest. The entanglement between a block of a one-dimensional chain and everything outside it, against how long the block is, for three states of the same number of particles. The straight line is a randomly chosen state, whose entanglement is the block's length times the logarithm of two — a volume law, and what almost every state in Hilbert space does. The flat curve is the ground state of a chain with a gap: it saturates, varying by less than a twentieth of a per cent from a block of eight to one of forty, because the boundary of a one-dimensional block is two points however long the block is. The middle curve is the ground state of a gapless chain, which grows as the logarithm of the size with a coefficient measured here as 0.333 against the third that conformal field theory gives. Both ground states are enormously less entangled than a random state, and that is not a detail about chains: it is why a ground state can be written down at all.

The corner of Hilbert space that is ever visited

Monogamy between three parties says how much of a correlation a pair may hold. Read across a boundary in a many-body system it says something much stronger: the entanglement between a region and the rest scales with the boundary rather than the volume, for the ground state of anything with local interactions. That is why such a state can be written down at all — and why almost every state in Hilbert space is one that nothing ever prepares.

quantum · Entanglement A pendulum with unequal steps. The potential −EJ cos φ of the junction against its phase, at EJ/EC = 50, with the lowest 4 levels of the circuit drawn across the well between their classical turning points, in units of the charging energy. The transitions are 18.94, 17.79, 16.50, each smaller than the one below it; a harmonic well of the same curvature would space them all at the square root of 8·EJ·EC, 20.00. The spacing shrinks because the cosine is flatter than a parabola away from its bottom, and the shrinking is what lets a microwave pulse tuned to the lowest transition leave the next one alone.

The circuit that forgets its charge

A tiny superconducting island joined to its surroundings through a Josephson junction has discrete energy levels, and two of them make a quantum bit. The first such circuits were ruined by stray charges on nearby surfaces, which moved their levels and scrambled any superposition within a nanosecond. The cure was to make the junction's energy fifty times the charging energy. That makes the levels exponentially insensitive to charge while costing only a power-law loss in the unequal spacing that lets one transition be driven alone.

electromagnetism · Superconductivity A temperature the circuit refuses to go below. The escape temperature — the temperature that would give the measured escape rate if escape were purely thermal — against the actual temperature of the junction, for a 10 µA, 5 pF junction at biases of 0.985 and 0.99 of its critical current. Hot, the two are equal: the phase is kicked over the barrier by thermal noise. Cooled below the crossover, 39 mK at 0.985 and 36 mK at 0.99, the escape temperature stops falling and levels off at 42 mK and 44 mK: the rate no longer depends on the temperature at all. This levelling-off, measured by Michel Devoret, John Martinis and John Clarke in 1985 with the junction's electrical environment carefully characterised, was the evidence that a macroscopic electrical variable tunnels.

The circuit that goes through a wall

Tunnelling is usually told about electrons and alpha particles — single, small, quantum things passing through barriers they cannot climb. In 1985 it was seen in an electrical circuit: the phase difference across a Josephson junction, a coordinate shared by all the electrons in two pieces of superconducting metal, trapped in a well and escaping from it through the barrier rather than over it. The evidence was a temperature below which the circuit's escape rate stopped caring how cold it was. The same circuit showed discrete energy levels, and its descendants are the qubits of superconducting quantum computers.

quantum · Tunnelling The same fringes from cooler and hotter molecules. The rate at which molecules arrive across a few periods of the interference pattern behind the last grating, relative to its mean, for molecules at 1000, 2500, 3000 K, each with the visibility the emission model gives: 46 per cent, 14 per cent, 4 per cent. The cooler molecules draw fringes nearly as strong as cold ones; at 3000 K the pattern is a faint ripple on a flat background. The average number arriving is the same in every case: the heated molecules are not lost, and none of them has been deflected out of the beam. They arrive in the same places on average and no longer interfere.

The molecule that interferes until it glows

A molecule of seventy carbon atoms, sent through a matter-wave interferometer, travels both arms at once and lands in fringes, as an electron or a neutron does. Heat it, and the fringes fade. Nothing has touched it from outside: a hot molecule glows, and each photon it gives off is a messenger that may carry away the information of which arm it was in. Whether it does depends on one comparison — the photon's wavelength against the separation of the arms. Long photons leave the fringes alone; short ones erase them. The loss of interference that is usually described as the onset of the classical world is here a measurement made by the molecule's own light, and its threshold can be computed.

quantum · Matter waves A chaotic rotor heats without limit, and its quantum version stops. The mean kinetic energy of a rotor kicked once a period by a potential of strength K = 5, against the number of kicks, starting at rest. Classically (an ensemble of 4,000 rotors with random angles) the motion is chaotic and the momentum random-walks, so the energy grows in a straight line, 6.3 per kick, near the K²/4 = 6.25 a random walk of kicks K sin θ gives. Quantum mechanically, with an effective Planck constant ƛ = 1 and 0.5, the energy follows the classical line for a while and then stops, fluctuating about 58 and 123: the smaller ƛ lets it follow the classical growth for longer and climb further before it stops. Nothing in the quantum rotor's equations damps it; the growth stops by interference.

The heating a quantum rotor refuses

Kick a freely turning rotor hard, at regular intervals, and classical mechanics says its motion becomes chaotic and its energy grows without limit, the momentum random-walking upward with every kick. Do the same to a quantum rotor and it follows the classical heating for a while, then stops — not because anything damps it, but because the waves of its momentum states interfere so as to cancel further spreading. The correspondence principle, which promises classical behaviour when quantum numbers are large, is broken here in the most direct way: by a quantum system that refuses to get hot.

quantum · Correspondence

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

InterferenceSuperpositionEntanglementCorrespondence principleProbability densityAnharmonicityClassical limitCoherenceCoherent stateCorrelationCrossover scaleDensity matrix

All concepts