[Paper Review] Heuristic explanation of quantum interference experiments

Guowen Wang|ArXiv.org|Jan 25, 2005

Quantum Mechanics and Applications3 citations

TL;DR

This paper proposes a realistic interpretation of quantum mechanics by modeling particles as non-spreading wave packets within special relativity, with interference explained via a coupling interaction between peaked and non-peaked wave components. The approach resolves wave-particle duality without wave function collapse, supports physical reality of particles, and reinterprets Bell inequalities as indicators of quantum probability differences rather than non-locality or incompleteness.

ABSTRACT

A particle is described as a non-spreading wave packet satisfying a linear equation within the framework of special relativity. Young's and other interference experiments are explained with a hypothesis that there is a coupling interaction between the peaked and non-peaked pieces of the wave packet. This explanation of the interference experiments provides a realistic interpretation of quantum mechanics. The interpretation implies that there is physical reality of particles and no wave function collapse. It also implies that neither classical mechanics nor current quantum mechanics is a complete theory for describing physical reality and the Bell inequalities are not the proper touchstones for reality and locality. The problems of the boundary between the macro-world and micro-world and the de-coherence in the transition region (meso-world) between the two are discussed. The present interpretation of quantum mechanics is consistent with the physical aspects of the Copenhagen interpretation, such as, the superposition principle, Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and Born's probability interpretation, but does not favor its philosophical aspects, such as, non-reality, non-objectivity, non-causality and the complementary principle.

Motivation & Objective

• To resolve the wave-particle duality paradox in quantum mechanics through a realistic, non-collapse interpretation.
• To explain single-particle interference experiments like Young’s double-slit and electron bi-prism experiments without invoking observer-created reality.
• To challenge the Copenhagen interpretation’s philosophical foundations, particularly non-reality and non-objectivity, while preserving its physical principles.
• To re-evaluate the role of Bell inequalities as measures of locality and reality, arguing they are not definitive for quantum completeness.
• To clarify the boundary between the macro-world and micro-world by introducing a meso-world transition where decoherence emerges from screening effects.

Proposed method

• Model particles as non-spreading wave packets satisfying a linear relativistic equation in four-dimensional space (x, y, z, w), with w representing proper time scaled by c.
• Use a Fourier integral representation of the wave packet centered at the origin, incorporating phase speed c and momentum components in w and x directions.
• Introduce a coupling interaction hypothesis between the peaked (localized) and non-peaked (delocalized) parts of the wave packet to explain interference.
• Apply the model to explain interference in Young’s two-slit experiment, single-photon diffraction, and electron interference via the same coupling mechanism.
• Extend the model to explain interference of independent photon beams (Pfleegor-Mandel) by assuming inter-beam coupling between non-peaked components.
• Use the wave packet and coupling interaction to interpret time-coherence effects, such as in Einstein’s photon-box thought experiment, and to model quantum tunnelling and entanglement.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 How can a single particle pass through both slits simultaneously and interfere with itself without wave function collapse?
• RQ2 What is the physical mechanism underlying quantum interference in single-particle experiments?
• RQ3 Can a realistic interpretation of quantum mechanics be constructed that preserves physical reality and causality?
• RQ4 Why do interference patterns emerge in experiments with low-intensity beams, even when particles are sent one at a time?
• RQ5 What is the nature of the boundary between the classical macro-world and the quantum micro-world, and how does decoherence emerge in the meso-world?

Key findings

• The non-spreading wave packet model provides a consistent, realistic description of particles that avoids wave function collapse and supports physical reality of particles.
• Interference arises from a coupling interaction between the peaked and non-peaked components of the wave packet, not from self-interference in the traditional sense.
• The model explains single-photon and single-electron interference experiments without requiring non-locality or observer-dependent reality.
• The violation of Bell-type inequalities does not rule out local realism, as the quantum probability differs fundamentally from classical-like probability.
• Decoherence in the meso-world arises from screening effects in larger objects, eliminating a sharp boundary between macroscopic and microscopic behavior.
• The coupling interaction is local and may underlie the non-local quantum potential in Bohmian mechanics, suggesting a physical origin for quantum non-locality.