The problem of detection time distribution concerns a quantum particle surrounded by detectors and consists of computing the probability distribution of where and when the particle will be detected. While the correct answer can be obtained in principle by solving the Schrodinger equation of particle and detectors together, a more practical answer should involve a simple rule representing the behavior of idealized detectors. We have argued elsewhere [http://arxiv.org/abs/1601.03715] that the most natural rule for this purpose is the "absorbing boundary rule," based on the 1-particle Schrodinger equation with a certain "absorbing" boundary condition, first considered by Werner in 1987, at the ideal detecting surface. Here we develop a relativistic variant of this rule using the Dirac equation and also a boundary condition. We treat one or several detectable particles, in flat or curved space-time, with stationary or moving detectors.
The problem of detection time distribution concerns a quantum particle surrounded by detectors and consists of computing the probability distribution of where and when the particle will be detected. While the correct answer can be obtained in principle by solving the Schrodinger equation of particle and detectors together, a more practical answer should involve a simple rule representing the behavior of idealized detectors. We have argued elsewhere [http://arxiv.org/abs/1601.03715] that the most natural rule for this purpose is the "absorbing boundary rule," based on the 1-particle Schrodinger equation with a certain "absorbing" boundary condition, first considered by Werner in 1987, at the ideal detecting surface. Here we develop a relativistic variant of this rule using the Dirac equation and also a boundary condition. We treat one or several detectable particles, in flat or curved space-time, with stationary or moving detectors.
Abstract Consider a non-relativistic quantum particle with wave function inside a region Ω⊂R3 Ω ⊂ R 3 , and suppose that detectors are placed along the boundary ∂Ω ∂ Ω . The question how to compute the probability distribution of the time at which the detector surface registers the particle boils down to finding a reasonable mathematical definition of an ideal detecting surface; a particularly convincing definition, called the absorbing boundary rule, involves a time evolution for the particle’s wave function ψ ψ expressed by a Schrödinger equation in Ω Ω together with an “absorbing” boundary condition on ∂Ω ∂ Ω first considered by Werner in 1987, viz., ∂ψ/∂n=iκψ ∂ ψ / ∂ n = i κ ψ with κ>0 κ > 0 and ∂/∂n ∂ / ∂ n the normal derivative. We provide here a discussion of the rigorous mathematical foundation of this rule. First, for the viability of the rule it plays a crucial role that these two equations together uniquely define the time evolution of ψ ψ ; we point out here how, under some technical assumptions on the regularity (i.e., smoothness) of the detecting surface, the Lumer-Phillips theorem implies that the time evolution is well defined and given by a contraction semigroup. Second, we show that the collapse required for the N-particle version of the problem is well defined. We also prove that the joint distribution of the detection times and places, according to the absorbing boundary rule, is governed by a positive-operator-valued measure.
We address the question of how to compute the probability distribution of the time at which a detector clicks in the situation of n nonrelativistic quantum particles in a volume $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Omega}}\ensuremath{\subset}{\mathbb{R}}^{3}$ in physical space and detectors placed along the boundary $\ensuremath{\partial}\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Omega}}$ of $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Omega}}$. We previously [Tumulka, Ann. Phys. (NY) 442, 168910 (2022)] argued in favor of a rule for the one-particle case that involves a Schr\"odinger equation with an absorbing boundary condition on $\ensuremath{\partial}\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Omega}}$ introduced by Werner; we call this rule the ``absorbing boundary rule.'' Here, we describe the natural extension of the absorbing boundary rule to the n-particle case. A key element of this extension is that, upon a detection event, the wave function gets collapsed by inserting the detected position, at the time of detection, into the wave function, thus yielding a wave function of $n\ensuremath{-}1$ particles. We also describe an extension of the absorbing boundary rule to the case of moving detectors.
There are several inequivalent proposals in the literature for how to compute the probability distribution of the time that a detector registers for the arrival of a quantum particle. For three of these proposals, based on two kinds of absorbing boundary conditions and imaginary potentials, we compute the predicted distribution for an experimental setup involving a single non-relativistic quantum particle with spin 0 or 1/2 in a wave guide along the z axis with the detector waiting downstream. We find that the distribution shows signs of partial reflection of the wave function off of the detector; for a spin-1/2 wave function, it is independent of the initial spin orientation for the parameters tested but does depend, for boundary conditions coupling to the spin, on the width of the wave guide. We also compare our predictions with the competing ones of Das and Dürr [arXiv:1802.07141].
We are concerned with the justification of the statement, commonly (explicitly or implicitly) used in quantum scattering theory, that for a free non-relativistic quantum particle with initial wave function Ψ0(x), surrounded by detectors along a sphere of large radius R, the probability distribution of the detection time and place has asymptotic density (i.e., scattering cross section) σ(x,t)=m3ℏ−3Rt−4∣Ψ0(mx/ℏt)∣2 with Ψ0 the Fourier transform of Ψ0. We give two derivations of this formula, based on different macroscopic models of the detection process. The first one consists of a negative imaginary potential of strength λ>0 in the detector volume (i.e., outside the sphere of radius R) in the limit R→∞,λ→0,Rλ→∞. The second one consists of repeated nearly-projective measurements of (approximately) the observable 1∣x∣>R at times T,2T,3T,… in the limit R→∞,T→∞,T/R→0; this setup is similar to that of the quantum Zeno effect, except that there one considers T→0 instead of T→∞. We also provide a comparison to Bohmian mechanics: while in the absence of detectors, the arrival times and places of the Bohmian trajectories on the sphere of radius R have asymptotic distribution density given by the same formula as σ, their deviation from the detection times and places is not necessarily small, although it is small compared to R, so the effect of the presence of detectors on the particle can be neglected in the far-field regime. We also cover the generalization to surfaces with non-spherical shape, to the case of N non-interacting particles, to time-dependent surfaces, and to the Dirac equation.
Time of arrival refers to the time a particle takes after emission to impinge upon a suitably idealised detector surface. Within quantum theory, no generally accepted solution exists so far for the corresponding probability distribution of arrival times. In this work we derive a general solution for a single body without spin impacting on a so called ideal detector in the absence of any other forces or obstacles. A solution of the so called screen problem for this case is also given. After discussing the shortcomings of the so called ‘absorbing boundary condition’, which is arguably the natural approach within quantum mechanics, we construct the ideal detector model via mathematical probability theory. This detector model assures that the probability flux through the detector surface is always positive, so that the corresponding distributions can be derived via an approach originally suggested by Daumer, Dürr, Goldstein, and Zanghì. The resulting dynamical model is based on an adaption of the Madelung equations and is, strictly speaking, not compatible with quantum mechanics. Still, it is well-described within geometric quantum theory. Geometric quantum theory is a novel adaption of quantum mechanics, which makes the latter consistent with mathematical probability theory. Implications to the general theory of measurement and avenues for future research are also provided. Future mathematical work should focus on finding an appropriate distributional formulation of the evolution equations and studying the well-posedness of the corresponding Cauchy problem.
Abstract Imaginary potentials such as V(x) = −iσ1Ω(x) (with σ > 0 a constant, Ω a subset of 3-space, and 1Ω its characteristic function) have been used in quantum mechanics as models of a detector. They represent the effect of a ‘soft’ detector that takes a while to notice a particle in the detector volume Ω. In order to model a ‘hard’ detector (i.e. one that registers a particle as soon as it enters Ω), one may think of taking the limit σ → ∞ of increasing detector strength σ. However, as pointed out by Allcock, in this limit the particle never enters Ω; its wave function gets reflected at the boundary ∂Ω of Ω in the same way as by a Dirichlet boundary condition on ∂Ω. This phenomenon, a cousin of the ‘quantum Zeno effect,’ might suggest that a hard detector is mathematically impossible. Nevertheless, a mathematical description of a hard detector has recently been put forward in the form of the ‘absorbing boundary rule’ involving an absorbing boundary condition on the detecting surface ∂Ω. We show here that in a suitable (non-obvious) limit, the imaginary potential V yields a non-trivial distribution of detection time and place in agreement with the absorbing boundary rule. That is, a hard detector can be obtained as a limit, but it is a different limit than Allcock considered.