It is widely believed that statistical interpretation of quantum mechanics requires that density operators representing quantum states be normalized. We present a description of selective measurements in terms of density operators. The description is inspired by Schwinger's Algebra of Microscopic Measurements. Density operators used are not normalized. We do not know applications of density operators requiring normalization.
It is widely believed that statistical interpretation of quantum mechanics requires that density operators representing quantum states be normalized. We present a description of selective measurements in terms of density operators. The description is inspired by Schwinger's Algebra of Microscopic Measurements. Density operators used are not normalized. We do not know applications of density operators requiring normalization.
The concept of a quantum state represents one of the most fundamental pillars of the paradigm of quantum theory.'3 Contrary to its mathematical elegance and convenience in calculations, the physical interpretation of a quantum state is not so transparent. The problem is that the quantum state (described either by a state vector, or density operator or a phase-space probability density distribution) does not have a well defined objective status, i.e. a state vector is not an objective property of a particle. According to Peres (see,1 p. 374): "There is no physical evidence whatsoever that every physical system has at every instant a well defined state. .. In strict interpretation of quantum theory these mathematical symbols [i.e., state vectorsi represent statistical information enabling us to compute the probabilities of occurrence of specific events." Once this point of view is adopted then it becomes clear that any "measurement" or a reconstruction of a density operator (or its mathematical equivalent) can be understood exclusively as an expression of our knowledge about the quantum mechanical state based on a certain set of measured data. To be more specific, any quantum-mechanical reconstruction scheme is nothing more than an a posteriori estimation of the density operator of a quantum-mechanical (microscopic) system based on data obtained with the help of a macroscopic measurement apparatus.3 The quality of the reconstruction depends on the "quality" of the measured data and the efficiency of the reconstruction procedure with the help of which the data analysis is performed. In particular, we can specify three different situations. Firstly, when all system observables are precisely measured. In this case the complete reconstruction of an initially unknown state can be performed (we will call this the reconstruction on the complete observation level) . Secondly, when just part of the system observables is precisely measured then one cannot perform a complete reconstruction of the measured state. Nevertheless, the reconstructed density operator still uniquely determines mean values of the measured observables (we will denote this scheme as reconstruction on incomplete observation levels) . Finally, when measurement does not provide us with sufficient information to specify the exact mean values (or probability distributions) but only the frequencies of appearances of eigenstates of the measured observables, then one can perform an estimation (e.g. reconstruction based on quantum Bayesian inference) which is the "best" with respect to the given measured data and the a priori knowledge about the state of the measured system.
In this lecture, I lay down the basics for the study of the dynamics of a large collection of identical spin systems by introducing the concept of a density operator and an equation for its evolution. Ensembles of spin systems represent macroscopic samples; in quantum mechanics, these can only be described in statistical terms through a density operator. This latter can be expressed in terms of spin angular momentum operators. The density operator allows all measurable properties of an ensemble of spin systems to be determined.
Schwinger’s algebra of selective measurements has a natural interpretation in the formalism of groupoids. Its kinematical foundations, as well as the structure of the algebra of observables of the theory, were presented in [F. M. Ciaglia, A. Ibort and G. Marmo, Schwinger’s picture of quantum mechanics I: Groupoids, Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2019), arXiv: 1905.12274 [math-ph]. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219887819501196 . F. M. Ciaglia, A. Ibort and G. Marmo, Schwinger’s picture of quantum mechanics II: Algebras and observables, Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219887819501366 ]. In this paper, a closer look to the statistical interpretation of the theory is taken and it is found that an interpretation in terms of Sorkin’s quantum measure emerges naturally. It is proven that a suitable class of states of the algebra of virtual transitions of the theory allows to define quantum measures by means of the corresponding decoherence functionals. Quantum measures satisfying a reproducing property are described and a class of states, called factorizable states, possessing the Dirac–Feynman “exponential of the action” form are characterized. Finally, Schwinger’s transformation functions are interpreted similarly as transition amplitudes defined by suitable states. The simple examples of the qubit and the double slit experiment are described in detail, illustrating the main aspects of the theory.
The Statistical Interpretation of quantum theory is formulated for the purpose of providing a sound interpretation using a minimum of assumptions. Several arguments are advanced in favor of considering the quantum state description to apply only to an ensemble of similarily prepared systems, rather than supposing, as is often done, that it exhaustively represents an individual physical system. Most of the problems associated with the quantum theory of measurement are artifacts of the attempt to maintain the latter interpretation. The introduction of hidden variables to determine the outcome of individual events is fully compatible with the statistical predictions of quantum theory. However, a theorem due to Bell seems to require that any such hidden-variable theory which reproduces all of quantum mechanics exactly (i.e., not merely in some limiting case) must possess a rather pathological character with respect to correlated, but spacially separated, systems.
For systems which obey quantum mechanics, the formulation of the problem of treating large numbers of particles is, of course, somewhat different than it is for classical systems. The microscopic description of the system is provided by a wave function which (in the absence of spin) is a function of the classical coordinates { q i }. The mathematical model is provided by a Hamiltonian operator H which is often obtained from the corresponding classical Hamiltonian by the replacement p i → ( ħ /i)(∂/∂ q i ). In other cases the form of the Hamiltonian operator is simply postulated. The microscopic dynamics are provided by the Schrödinger equation i ħ (∂Ψ/∂ t ) = H Ψ which requires as initial condition the knowledge of the wave function Ψ({ q i }, t ) at some initial time t 0 . (Boundary conditions on Ψ({ q i }, t ) must be specified as part of the description of the model as well.) The results of experiments in quantum mechanics are characterized by operators, usually obtained, like the Hamiltonian, from their classical forms and termed observables. Operators associated with observables must be Hermitian. In general, the various operators corresponding to observables do not commute with one another. It is possible to find sets of commuting operators whose mutual eigenstates span the Hilbert space in which the wave function is confined by the Schrödinger equation and the boundary conditions. A set of such (time independent) eigenstates, termed ψ ν ( q ), is a basis for the Hilbert space.
In this paper, we will present the main features of what can be called Schwinger’s foundational approach to Quantum Mechanics. The basic ingredients of this formulation are the selective measurements, whose algebraic composition rules define a mathematical structure called groupoid, which is associated with any physical system. After the introduction of the basic axioms of a groupoid, the concepts of observables and states, statistical interpretation and evolution are derived. An example is finally introduced to support the theoretical description of this approach.