I believe there is constructive interference btw both beams in detector 2, probably the numbers should be interchanged? E.g. for sensor 2 of the video, there are 1 transmission + 2 reflections for each beam.
what is causing the assymetry in the measured intensities here? The setup seems perfectly symmetrical, except for the direction of the input light. Is that direction causing the difference in the measured intensities?
There are actually 2 input ports... the moment you realize that you realize that there is no need to say the single photon that passes in spreads out into a wave taking both paths that collapses at the end, there is no need to then draw any of the conclusions people draw from interferometer based thought experiments: interaction free measurements, retrocausality, the "cheshire" effect, etc. It is all based on the assumption that there is only one input when there is two!
One of great lecture videos by an imminent in the field of Quantum Physics.
Good explanation, exactly what I have been looking for. Thank you.
Good work buddy I'm actually from Germany but it was so well explained
I understood it anyways😅
Thank you❤❤
Excellent explanation...
This blows my mind - if you sent a single particle, the phase shift would control which detector the particle arrives at (unless I'm mistaken).
I believe there is constructive interference btw both beams in detector 2, probably the numbers should be interchanged? E.g. for sensor 2 of the video, there are 1 transmission + 2 reflections for each beam.
I think is a erratum. If phase shift is 0, all intensity will get detector 2, E1+E2. The detector captions are interchanged!
what is causing the assymetry in the measured intensities here? The setup seems perfectly symmetrical, except for the direction of the input light. Is that direction causing the difference in the measured intensities?
the phase plate causes a phase shift in one of the components
Good explanation,Thank you.
@ 3:25 Very disappointing! He already discussed the beam-splitter and said nothing about it. @ 7:04 And again, there is only 1 input-port.
There are actually 2 input ports... the moment you realize that you realize that there is no need to say the single photon that passes in spreads out into a wave taking both paths that collapses at the end, there is no need to then draw any of the conclusions people draw from interferometer based thought experiments: interaction free measurements, retrocausality, the "cheshire" effect, etc. It is all based on the assumption that there is only one input when there is two!
@@QuantumPolyhedron Thanks. It would have been better to understand if he had mentioned what you have written above.