Critique of Quantum Optical Experimental Refutations of Bohr's Principle of Complementarity, of the Wootters-Zurek Principle of Complementarity, and of the Particle-Wave Duality Relation

TL;DR

This paper critiques quantum optical experiments claiming to refute Bohr's principle of complementarity, arguing they misunderstand the distinction from Wootters-Zurek relations and questioning the fundamental status of particle-wave duality.

Contribution

The paper clarifies the differences between Bohr's principle and Wootters-Zurek relations, and challenges the interpretation of particle-wave duality as a fundamental complementarity.

Findings

Quantum optical experiments fail to refute Bohr's principle

Wootters-Zurek relations are a misinterpretation of complementarity

Particle and wave concepts are not on equal footing as other complements

Abstract

I argue that quantum optical experiments that purport to refute Bohr's principle of complementarity (BPC) fail in their aim. Some of these experiments try to refute complementarity by refuting the so called particle-wave duality relations, which evolved from the Wootters-Zureck reformulation of BPC (WZPC). I therefore consider it important for my forgoing arguments to first recall the essential tenets of BPC, and to clearly separate BPC from WZPC, which I will argue is a direct contradiction of BPC. This leads to a need to consider the meaning of particle-wave duality relations and to question their fundamental status. I further argue (albeit, in opposition to BPC) that particle and wave complementary concepts are on a different footing than other pairs of complementary concepts.