ArticleslgStudy

physics

Popper's experiment

Popper's experiment is a physics topic covered in the lgStudy science library. This page brings together a partial reference excerpt, illustrations, worked examples, real-world applications and a short study plan, so you can understand Popper's experiment rather than just read about it. In short: Popper's experiment is an experiment proposed by the philosopher Karl Popper to test aspects of the uncertainty principle in quantum mechanics. History As early as 1934, Popper had started criticising the increasingly more accepted Copenhagen interpretation, a popular subjectivist interpretation of quantum mechanics.

Popper's experiment — main illustration
Popper's experiment — illustration

Key takeaways

  • Popper's experiment belongs to physics; place it in that map before memorising details.
  • Learn the definition first, then one example that makes the definition concrete.
  • Connect Popper's experiment to a quantity you can measure, compute or draw — that is where exam questions come from.
  • Reproduce the core statement of Popper's experiment from memory before moving on to harder problems.

Reference excerpt

Popper's experiment is an experiment proposed by the philosopher Karl Popper to test aspects of the uncertainty principle in quantum mechanics.

History As early as 1934, Popper had started criticising the increasingly more accepted Copenhagen interpretation, a popular subjectivist interpretation of quantum mechanics. Therefore, in his book Logik der Forschung he proposed a first experiment alleged to empirically discriminate between the Copenhagen Interpretation and a realist ensemble interpretation, which he advocated. Einstein, however, wrote a letter to Popper about the experiment in which he raised some crucial objections and Popper himself declared that this first attempt was "a gross mistake for which I have been deeply sorry and ashamed of ever since". Popper, however, came back to the foundations of quantum mechanics from 1948, when he developed his criticism of determinism in both quantum and classical physics. As a matter of fact, Popper greatly intensified his research activities on the foundations of quantum mechanics throughout the 1950s and 1960s developing his interpretation of quantum mechanics in terms of real existing probabilities (propensities), also thanks to the support of a number of distinguished physicists (such as David Bohm). In 1980, Popper proposed perhaps his more important, yet overlooked, contribution to QM: a "new simplified version of the EPR experiment". The experiment was however published only two years later, in the third volume of the Postscript to the Logic of Scientific Discovery. The most widely known interpretation of quantum mechanics is the Copenhagen interpretation put forward by Niels Bohr and his school. It maintains that observations lead to a wavefunction collapse, thereby suggesting the counter-intuitive result that two well separated, non-interacting systems require action-at-a-distance. Popper argued that such non-locality conflicts with common sense, and would lead to a subjectivist interpretation of phenomena, depending on the role of the 'observer'. While the EPR argument was always meant to be a thought experiment, put forward to shed light on the intrinsic paradoxes of QM, Popper proposed an experiment which could have been experimentally implemented and participated at a physics conference organised in Bari in 1983, to present his experiment and propose to the experimentalists to carry it out. The actual realisation of Popper's experiment required new techniques which would make use of the phenomenon of spontaneous parametric down-conversion but had not yet been exploited at that time, so his experiment was eventually performed only in 1999, five years after Popper had died.

Description Popper's experiment of 1980 exploits couples of entangled particles, in order to put to the test Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.

Indeed, Popper maintains: "I wish to suggest a crucial experiment to test whether knowledge alone is sufficient to create 'uncertainty' and, with it, scatter (as is contended under the Copenhagen interpretation), or whether it is the physical situation that is responsible for the scatter." Popper's proposed experiment consists of a low-intensity source of particles that can generate pairs of particles traveling to the left and to the right along the x-axis. The beam's low intensity is "so that the probability is high that two particles recorded at the same time on the left and on the right are those which have actually interacted before emission." There are two slits, one each in the paths of the two particles. Behind the slits are semicircular arrays of counters which can detect the particles after they pass through the slits (see Fig. 1). "These counters are coincident counters [so] that they only detect particles that have passed at the same time through A and B."

Popper argued that because the slits localize the particles to a narrow region along the y-axis, from the uncertainty principle they experience large uncertainties in the y-components of their momenta. This larger spread in the momentum will show up as particles being detected even at positions that lie outside the regions where particles would normally reach based on their initial momentum spread. Popper suggests that we count the particles in coincidence, i.e., we count only those particles behind slit B, whose partner has gone through slit A. Particles which are not able to pass through slit A are ignored. The Heisenberg scatter for both the beams of particles going to the right and to the left, is tested "by making the two slits A and B wider or narrower. If the slits are narrower, then counters should come into play which are higher up and lower down, seen from the slits. The coming into play of these counters is indicative of the wider scattering angles which go with a narrower slit, according to the Heisenberg relations."

Now the slit at A is made very small and the slit at B very wide. Popper wrote that, according to the EPR argument, we have measured position "y" for both particles (the one passing through A and the one passing through B) with the precision Δ y {\displaystyle \Delta y} , and not just for particle passing through slit A. This is because from the initial entangled EPR state we can calculate the position of the particle 2, once the position of particle 1 is known, with approximately the same precision. We can do this, argues Popper, even though slit B is wide open. Therefore, Popper states that "fairly precise "knowledge"" about the y position of particle 2 is made; its y position is measured indirectly. And since it is, according to the Copenhagen interpretation, our knowledge which is described by the theory – and especially by the Heisenberg relations — it should be expected that the momentum p y {\displaystyle p_{y}} of particle 2 scatters as much as that of particle 1, even though the slit A is much narrower than the widely opened slit at B.

… excerpt ends here. Continue reading the full article.

Illustrations

Popper's experiment: Fig.2 Experiment with slit A narrowed, and slit B wide open. Should the two particle show equal scatter in their momenta? If they do not, Popper says, the Copenhagen interpretation is wrong. If they do, it indicates action at a distance, says Popper.
Fig.2 Experiment with slit A narrowed, and slit B wide open. Should the two particle show equal scatter in their momenta? If they do not, Popper says, the Copenhagen interpretation is wrong. If they do, it indicates action at a distance, says Popper.
Popper's experiment: Fig.3 Schematic diagram of Kim and Shih's experiment based on a BBO crystal which generates entangled photons. The lens LS helps create a sharp image of slit A on the location of slit B.
Fig.3 Schematic diagram of Kim and Shih's experiment based on a BBO crystal which generates entangled photons. The lens LS helps create a sharp image of slit A on the location of slit B.
Popper's experiment: Fig.4 Results of the photon experiment by Kim and Shih, aimed at realizing Popper's proposal. The diffraction pattern in the absence of slit B (red symbols) is much narrower than that in the presence of a
real slit (blue symbols).
Fig.4 Results of the photon experiment by Kim and Shih, aimed at realizing Popper's proposal. The diffraction pattern in the absence of slit B (red symbols) is much narrower than that in the presence of a real slit (blue symbols).

Worked examples

Example 1 — a first encounter with Popper's experiment

Start with the simplest possible case. Write down what Popper's experiment claims or describes in one sentence, then invent the smallest concrete situation in which that sentence is true. In physics, the smallest case is usually a single object, a single equation or a single measurement. Check that every symbol or term in your sentence has a meaning in that case.

Example 2 — changing one variable

Take the situation from Example 1 and change exactly one quantity: double it, halve it, or set it to zero. Predict what should happen to Popper's experiment before you calculate. Comparing your prediction with the result is the fastest way to find out whether you understand the idea or only the words.

Example 3 — an exam-style question

Typical questions about Popper's experiment ask you to (a) state it precisely, (b) apply it to given data, and (c) explain a limitation. Practise writing all three answers in under five minutes; the third part is what separates a full-mark answer from an average one.

Applications of Popper's experiment

In research
Popper's experiment appears in physics research whenever the underlying quantities have to be modelled precisely. Papers usually cite it as a starting assumption and then explore where it breaks down.
In technology and industry
Engineering practice reuses Popper's experiment in design rules, simulations and safety margins. Knowing the idea lets you read a specification sheet and understand why the numbers look the way they do.
In the classroom
Popper's experiment is common in secondary-school and first-year university syllabi. It links to neighbouring topics Karl Popper, Philosophy of physics, Quantum measurement, so understanding it makes those chapters shorter.
In everyday life
Look for Popper's experiment outside the textbook — in sport, cooking, traffic, electronics or the sky above you. An example you found yourself is remembered far longer than one you were given.
Ask Teacher Smith questions about this articleOpens your AI tutor with a question about “Popper's experiment” →

Affiliate

Preply — study more efficiently by working with a personal tutor. 50% off.

How to study Popper's experiment in 20 minutes

  1. Read the reference excerpt below once, without taking notes.
  2. Close the page and write down what Popper's experiment means in your own words.
  3. Compare your version with the excerpt and mark what you missed.
  4. Work through the three examples above with pen and paper.
  5. Explain Popper's experiment out loud to somebody else — or to Teacher Smith in the lgStudy chat.

Frequently asked questions

What is Popper's experiment in simple terms?

Popper's experiment is an experiment proposed by the philosopher Karl Popper to test aspects of the uncertainty principle in quantum mechanics. History As early as 1934, Popper had started criticising the increasingly more accepted Copenhagen interpretation, a popular subjectivist interpretation of…

Why does Popper's experiment matter?

Because it connects several physics ideas at once: it gives you a definition you can apply, a quantity you can calculate, and a way to check whether a result is plausible.

How should I study Popper's experiment?

Read the excerpt, restate it from memory, then work through the examples and applications listed on this page. The five-step study plan above takes about twenty minutes.

What does this page cover?

It gives you a compact reference excerpt plus original lgStudy explanations, examples, applications and study material on Popper's experiment.

Tags

  • Karl Popper
  • Philosophy of physics
  • Quantum measurement
  • Thought experiments in physics

Keep exploring