Wave particle duality

1. Wave particle duality • “Quantum nature of light” refers to the particle attribute of light • “Quantum nature of particle” refers to the wave attribute of a particle • Light (classically EM waves) is said to display “wave-particle duality” – it behave like wave in one experiment but as particle in others (c.f. a person with schizophrenia)

3. Not only light does have “schizophrenia”, so are other microscopic ``particle’’ such as electron, (see later chapters), i.e. particle” also manifest wave characteristics in some experiments • Wave-particle duality is essentially the manifestation of the quantum nature of things • This is an very weird picture quite contradicts to our conventional assumption with is deeply rooted on classical physics or intuitive notion on things

4. When is light wave and when is it particle? • Whether light displays wave or particle nature depends on the object it is interacting with, and also on the experimental set-up to observe it • If an experiment is set-up to observe the wave nature (such as in interference or diffraction experiment), it displays wave nature • If the experimental set-up has a scale that is corresponding to the quantum nature of radiation, then light will displays particle behaviour, such as in Compton scatterings

5. Compton wavelength as a scale to set the quantum nature of light and matter (electron) • As an example of a ‘scale’ in a given experiment or a theory, let’s consider the Compton wavelength in Compton scattering • Compton wavelength is the lengthscale which characterises the onset of quantum nature of light (corpuscular nature) and electron (wave nature) in their interactions

6. Experimental scale vs Compton wavelength • If the wavelength of light is much larger than the Compton wavelength of the electron it is interacting with, light behaves like wave (e.g. in interference experiments with visible light). Compton effect is negligible in this case • On the other hand, if the wavelength of the radiation is comparable to the Compton wavelength of the interacting particle, light starts to behave like particle and collides with the electron in an ‘particle-particle’ manner

7. In short the identity manifested by light depends on what it “sees” (which in turns depend on its own wavelength) in a given experimental condition Microscopic matter particle (such as electron and atoms) also manifest wave-particle duality This will be the next agenda in our course

8. PYQ 1.16 Final Exam 2003/04 • Which of the following statements are true about light? • I. It propagates at the speed of c = 3 x 108 m/s in all medium • II. It’s an electromagnetic wave according to the Maxwell theory • III. It’s a photon according to Einstein • IV. It always manifests both characteristics of wave and particle simultaneously in a given experiment • A. I,IV B. II, III,IV C. I, II, III,IV • D. I, II E. II,III • ANS: E, my own question

9. Wavelike properties of particle • In 1923, while still a graduate student at the University of Paris, Louis de Broglie published a brief note in the journal Comptes rendus containing an idea that was to revolutionize our understanding of the physical world at the most fundamental level: That particle has intrinsic wave properties • For more interesting details: • http://www.davis-inc.com/physics/index.shtml Prince de Broglie, 1892-1987

10. de Broglie’s postulate (1924) • The postulate: there should be a symmetry between matter and wave. The wave aspect of matter is related to its particle aspect in exactly the same quantitative manner that is in the case for radiation. The total energy E and momentum p of an entity, for both matter and wave alike, is related to the frequency n of the wave associated with its motion via by Planck constant • E = hn; p = h/l

11. A particle with momentum p is pictured as a wave Matter wave with de Broglie wavelength l = p/h Particle with linear momentum p A particle has wavelength!!! l= h/p • is the de Broglie relation predicting the wave length of the matter wave l associated with the motion of a material particle with momentum p

12. A physical entity possess both aspects of particle and wave in a complimentary manner BUT why is the wave nature of material particle not observed? Because …

13. Because…we are too large and quantum effects are too small • Consider two extreme cases: • (i) an electron with kinetic energy K = 54 eV, de Broglie wavelenght, l = h/p = h / (2meK)1/2 = 1.65 Angstrom • (ii) a billard (100 g) ball moving with momentum p = mv = 0.1 kg x 10 m/s = 1 Ns, de Broglie wavelenght, l = h/p = 10-34 m, too small to be observed in any experiments

14. Matter wave is a quantum phenomena • This also means that this effect is difficult to observe in our macroscopic world (unless with the aid of some specially designed apparatus) • The smallness of h in the relation l = h/p makes wave characteristic of particles hard to be observed • The statement that when h  0, l becomes vanishingly small means that • the wave nature will becomes effectively ``shut-off’’ and there would appear to loss its wave nature whenever the relevant scale (e.g. the p of the particle) is too large in comparison with h ~ 10-34 Js • In other words, the wave nature will of a particle will only show up when the scale p is comparable (or smaller) to the size of h

15. A particle with momentum p is pictured as a wave Matter wave with de Broglie wavelength l = p/h A free particle with linear momentum p Recap: de Broglie’s postulate • Particles also have wave nature • The total energy E and momentum p of an entity, for both matter and wave alike, is related to the frequency n of the wave associated with its motion via by Planck constant E = hn; l= h/p • This is the de Broglie relation predicting the wave length of the matter wave l associated with the motion of a material particle with momentum p

16. What is the speed of the de Broglie wave? • The momentum of a moving body at is related to its measured speed via p = mv • On the other hand, de Broglie says a moving body has momentum and wavelength related by p = h/l • Then logically the speed of the de Broglie wavelength (lets call it vp) must be identified with v • Lets see if this is true

17. The speed of de Broglie wave is related to the wave’s frequency and de Broglie wavelength via vp=l f • where the de Broglie wavelength l is related to the body’s measured speed via l= h/(mv) • The energy carried by a quantum of the de Broglie wave is given by E=hf • The energy E must also be equal to the relativistic energy of the moving body, E = mc2

18. Equating both, hf = mc2  f = mc2/h • Substitute the de Broglie frequency into vp=l f we obtain vp=(h/mv)(mc2/h)=c2/v > c !!!! • We arrive at the unphysical picture that the speed of the de Broglie wave vp not only is unequal to v but also > c • So, something is going wrong here

19. Phase and group velocity of the de Broglie wave • In the previous calculation we have failed to identify vp with v • The reason being that vp is actually the PHASE velocity of the de Broglie wave • By right we should have used the GROUP velocity • We should picture the moving particle as a wave group instead of a pure wave with only single wavelength • From the previous lecture, we have learned that the group velocity is given by vg = dw/dk • We would like to see how vg is related to the moving object’s speed

20. Indeed vg is identified with v

21. The de Broglie’ group wave is identified with the moving body’s v

22. Example • An electron has a de Broglie wavelength of 2.00 pm. Find its kinetic energy and the phase and the group velocity of its de Broglie waves. • You will do this example in your Tutorial 4 • Please DIY!!!

23. Matter wave (l = h/p) is a quantum phenomena • The appearance of h is a theory generally means quantum effect is taking place (e.g. Compton effect, PE, pair-production/annihilation) • Quantum effects are generally difficult to observe due to the smallness of h and is easiest to be observed in experiments at the microscopic (e.g. atomic) scale • The wave nature of a particle (i.e. the quantum nature of particle) will only show up when the linear momentum scale p of the particle times the length dimension characterising the experiment ( p x d) is comparable (or smaller) to the quantum scale of h • We will illustrate this concept with two examples

24. h characterises the scale of quantum physics • Example: shoot a beam of electron to go though a double slit, in which the momentum of the beam, p =(2meK)1/2, can be controlled by tuning the external electric potential that accelerates them • In this way we can tune the length l [ = h /(2meK)1/2 ]of the wavelength of the electron

25. Let d = width between the double slits (= the length scale characterising the experiment) • The parameter q = l / d, (the ‘resolution angle’ on the interference pattern) characterises the interference pattern l d If we measure a non vanishing value of q in an experiment, this means we have measures interference (wave) q q

26. If there is no interference happening, the parameter q = l / d becomes 0 Wave properties of the incident beam is not revealed as no interference pattern is observed. We can picture the incident beam as though they all comprise of particles q 0 q 0

27. Electrons behave like particle when l = h/p<< d, like wave when l= h/p≈ d • If in an experiment the magnitude of pd are such that q = l / d = (h /pd) << 1 (too tiny to be observed), electrons behave like particles and no interference is observed. In this scenario, the effect of h is negligible Electron behave like particle • If q = l /d is not observationally negligible, the wave nature is revealed via the observed interference pattern • This will happen if the momentum of the electrons are tuned in such a wat that q = l / d = (h /pd)is experimentally discernable. Here electrons behave like wave. In this case, the effect of h is not negligible, hence quantum effect sets in Electron behave like wave

28. Essentially • h characterised the scale at which quantum nature of particles starts to take over from macroscopic physics • Whenever h is not negligible compared to the characteristic scales of the experimental setup (= p d in the previous example), particle behaves like wave; whenever h is negligible compared to pd, particle behave like just a conventional particle

29. Electron as particle Electron as wave Is electron wave or particle? • They are both…but not simultaneously • In any experiment (or empirical observation) only one aspect of either wave or particle, but not both can be observed simultaneously. • It’s like a coin with two faces. But one can only see one side of the coin but not the other at any instance • This is the so-called wave-particle duality

30. Homework • Please read section 5.7 THE WAVE-PARTICLE DUALITY in page 179-185 to get a more comprehensive answer to the question: is electron particle or wave • It’s a very interesting and highly intellectual topic to investigate

31. Davisson and Gremer experiment • DG confirms the wave nature of electron in which it undergoes Bragg’s diffraction • Thermionic electrons are produced by hot filament, accelerated and focused onto the target (all apparatus is in vacuum condition) • Electrons are scattered at an angle f into a movable detector

32. Pix of Davisson and Gremer

33. Result of the DG experiment • Distribution of electrons is measured as a function of f • Strong scattered e- beam is detected atf = 50 degree for V = 54 V

34. How to interpret the result of DG? • Electrons get diffracted by the atoms on the surface (which acted as diffraction grating) of the metal as though the electron acting like they are WAVE • Electron do behave like wave as postulated by de Broglie

35. Constructive Bragg’s diffraction • The peak of the diffraction pattern is the m=1st order constructive interference: dsin f =1l • where f = 50 degree for V = 54 V • From x-ray Bragg’s diffraction experiment done independentlywe know d = 2.15 Amstrong • Hence the wavelength of the electron is l = dsinq = 1.65 Angstrom • Here, 1.65 Angstrom is the experimentally inferred value, which is to be checked against the theoretical value predicted by de Broglie f

36. Theoretical value of l of the electron • An external potential V accelerates the electron via eV=K • In the DG experiment the kinetic energy of the electron is accelerated to K = 54 eV (non-relativistic treatment is suffice because K << mec2 = 0.51 MeV) • According to de Broglie, the wavelength of an electron accelerated to kinetic energy of K = p2/2me = 54 eV has a equivalent matter wave wavelength l = h/p = h/(2Kme)-1/2 = 1.67 Amstrong • In terms of the external potential, • l = h/(2eVme)-1/2

37. Theory’s prediction matches measured value • The result of DG measurement agrees almost perfectly with the de Broglie’s prediction: 1.65 Angstrom measured by DG experiment against 1.67 Angstrom according to theoretical prediction • Wave nature of electron is hence experimentally confirmed • In fact, wave nature of microscopic particles are observed not only in e- but also in other particles (e.g. neutron, proton, molecules etc. – most strikingly Bose-Einstein condensate)

38. Application of electrons wave: electron microscope, Nobel Prize 1986 (Ernst Ruska)

39. Electron’s de Broglie wavelength can be tunned via • l = h/(2eVme)-1/2 • Hence electron microscope can magnify specimen (x4000 times) for biological specimen or 120,000 times of wire of about 10 atoms in width

40. Other manifestation of electron’s wave nature • Experimentally it also seen to display diffraction pattern

41. Not only electron, other microscopic particles also behave like wave at the quantum scale • The following atomic structural images provide insight into the threshold between prime radiant flow and the interference structures called matter.    • In the right foci of the ellipse a real cobalt atom has been inserted. In the left foci of the ellipse a phantom of the real atom has appeared. The appearance of the phantom atom was not expected.  • The ellipsoid coral was constructed by placing 36 cobalt atom on a copper surface. This image is provided here to provide a visual demonstration of the attributes of material matter arising from the harmonious interference of background radiation.  QUANTUM CORAL http://home.netcom.com/~sbyers11/grav11E.htm

42. Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle (Nobel Prize,1932) • WERNER HEISENBERG (1901 - 1976) • was one of the greatest physicists of the twentieth century. He is best known as a founder of quantum mechanics, the new physics of the atomic world, and especially for the uncertainty principle in quantum theory. He is also known for his controversial role as a leader of Germany's nuclear fission research during World War II. After the war he was active in elementary particle physics and West German science policy. • http://www.aip.org/history/heisenberg/p01.htm

43. A particle is represented by a wave packet/pulse • Since we experimentally confirmed that particles are wave in nature at the quantum scale h (matter wave) we now have to describe particles in term of waves (relevant only at the quantum scale) • Since a real particle is localised in space (not extending over an infinite extent in space), the wave representation of a particle has to be in the form of wave packet/wave pulse

44. As mentioned before, wavepulse/wave packet is formed by adding many waves of different amplitudes and with the wave numbers spanning a range of Dk (or equivalently, Dl) Recall that k = 2p/l, hence Dk/k = Dl/l Dx

45. Still remember the uncertainty relationships for classical waves? • As discussed earlier, due to its nature, a wave packet must obey the uncertainty relationships for classical waves (which are derived mathematically with some approximations) • However a more rigorous mathematical treatment (without the approximation) gives the exact relations • To describe a particle with wave packet that is localised over a small region Dx requires a large range of wave number; that is, Dk is large. Conversely, a small range of wave number cannot produce a wave packet localised within a small distance.

46. Matter wave representing a particle must also obey similar wave uncertainty relation • For matter waves, for which their momentum (energy) and wavelength (frequency) are related by p = h/l (E = hn), the uncertainty relationship of the classical wave is translated into • Where • Prove these yourselves (hint: from p = h/l, Dp/p = Dl/l)

47. Heisenberg uncertainty relations • The product of the uncertainty in momentum (energy) and in position (time) is at least as large as Planck’s constant

48. What means • It sets the intrinsic lowest possible limits on the uncertainties in knowing the values of pxand x, no matter how good an experiments is made • It is impossible to specify simultaneously and with infinite precision the linear momentum and the corresponding position of a particle

49. What means • If a system is known to exist in a state of energy E over a limited period Dt, then this energy is uncertain by at least an amount h/(4pDt) • therefore, the energy of an object or system can be measured with infinite precision (DE=0) only if the object of system exists for an infinite time (Dt→∞)

50. Conjugate variables (Conjugate observables) • {px,x}, {E,t} are called conjugate variables • The conjugate variables cannot in principle be measured (or known) to infinite precision simultaneously