Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1603.06008 · Physical Review A

What happens in a measurement?

Steven Weinberg

Published Mar 18, 2016• 29 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

It is assumed that in a measurement the system under study interacts with a macroscopic measuring apparatus, in such a way that the density matrix of the measured system evolves according to the Lindblad equation. Under an assumption of nondecreasing von Neumann entropy, conditions on the operators appearing in this equation are given that are necessary and sufficient for the late-time limit of the density matrix to take the form appropriate for a measurement. Where these conditions are satisfied, the Lindblad equation can be solved explicitly. The probabilities appearing in the late-time limit of this general solution are found to agree with the Born rule, and are independent of the details of the operators in the Lindblad equation.

DOI
10.1103/physreva.93.032124

Related papers

Timeless Histories: Quantum Measurement and the Maximum Entropy Principle

Alexei V. Tkachenko

The quantum measurement problem, i.e., the apparent conflict between unitary quantum evolution and non-unitary, stochastic wave-function collapse, remains unresolved a century after the formulation of quantum mechanics. We first review the standard picture, from the Copenhagen prescription with its Heisenberg cut, through von Neumann's movable cut, to environment-induced decoherence, which explains the emergence of stable classical records but still presupposes the Born rule and therefore cannot by itself replace the measurement postulates. We then connect this problem to the Maximum Entropy Principle in two complementary ways. First, decoherence drives the measurement apparatus toward the least biased state compatible with the dynamically protected pointer distribution, so that the emergent collapse may be viewed as a thermodynamic relaxation toward constrained maximum entropy. Second, we propose a Timeless Histories formulation of quantum mechanics in which the primitive objects are ordered sequences of events rather than evolving wave functions. Their conditional probabilities are assigned, relative to specified refinements, by a single Born-Boltzmann rule that combines the quadratic structure of Born's rule with Boltzmann's counting of equally probable microstates. The textbook form of Born's rule, the projection postulate, density operators, and wave functions are then recovered as derived informational constructs, while collapse becomes Bayesian conditioning on recorded events. Time and space enter only subsequently through unitary translation symmetry. Since the probability rule is postulated without reference to any physical collapse or classical observer, the usual circularity of the decoherence program is avoided. Decoherence can then be invoked to explain the stability and approximate additivity of macroscopic records, i.e., the emergence of classicality.

arXiv:2311.04893•Entropy•Sep 22, 2026•0 citations

Why state of quantum system is fully defined by density matrix

A. V. Nenashev

We show that probabilities of results of all possible measurements performing on a quantum system depend on the system's state only through its density matrix. Therefore all experimentally available information about the state contains in the density matrix. In this study, we do not postulate that measurements obey some given formalism (such as observables, positive-operator valued measures, etc.), and do not use Born rule. The process of measurement is considered in a fully operational manner---as an interaction of a measured system with some black-box apparatus. The key point of our approach is the proof that, for improper mixtures, the expected value of any measurement depends linearly on the reduced density function. Such a proof is achieved by considering appropriate thought experiments. We demonstrate that Born rule can be derived as a natural consequence of our results.

arXiv:1601.08205•Jan 29, 2016•1 citation

Necessary and Sufficient Condition on the Lindblad Equation to Prevent Entropy Increase

Steven Weinberg

It is shown that in order for the solutions of the Lindblad equation never to give a decreasing von Neumann entropy, it is necessary and sufficient that the operators appearing in this equation should be unitary linear combinations of their adjoints. In this case, these operators may be replaced with Hermitian operators, without changing the evolution of density matrices.

arXiv:1511.06016•Nov 18, 2015•0 citations

Problems of Quantum Measurement

Joseph F. Johnson

We derive the probabilities of measurement results from Schroedinger's equation plus a definition of macroscopic as a particular kind of thermodynamic limit. Bohr's insight that a measurement apparatus must be classical in nature and classically describable is made precise in a mathematical sense analogous to the procedures of classical statistical mechanics and the study of Hamiltonian heat baths.

arXiv:quant-ph/0502124•Feb 21, 2005•0 citations

Quantum clock and Newtonian time

Dorje C. Brody, Lane P. Hughston

An extension of standard quantum mechanics is proposed in which the Newtonian time appearing as a parameter in the unitary evolution operator is replaced with the time shown by a `quantum clock'. Such a clock is defined by the following properties: (a) the time that the clock shows is nondecreasing, (b) the clock ticks at random Newtonian times with random tick sizes, and (c) on average the clock shows the Newtonian time. We show that the leading term in the evolution equation for the density matrix associated with any quantum clock gives the von Neumann equation. The leading correction to the von Neumann equation is given by the Lindblad equation generated by the Hamiltonian, but there are higher-order terms that generalize the von Neumann equation and the Lindblad terms. Modifications to the von Neumann equation are worked out in detail in a parametric family of models for which the tick sizes are gamma distributed. Lower bounds on the parameters of these quantum clock models are derived using the precision limit of an atomic clock. An anomalous term in the Ehrenfest theorem for a free particle is derived, which in principle can be used as a basis for testing such models.

quant-pharXiv:2602.02077•Feb 3, 2026•0 citations

More on the quantum measurement problem

Donald G. Truhlar

Sean Carroll’s July Quick Study, “Addressing the quantum measurement problem” (page 62), brings up the following question: Does the wavefunction still obey the Schrödinger equation when a measurement is made? A system being measured (or interacting with its environment in any other way) is actually a subsystem, and a subsystem is properly described by a reduced density matrix. The density matrix for an entire system corresponds to a wavefunction—that is, to a pure state—but the density matrix for a subsystem does not necessarily correspond to a wavefunction. The reduced density matrix of a subsystem may correspond to an impure state, also called a mixture or an incoherent combination,11. A. Bohm, Quantum Mechanics: Foundations and Applications, 3rd ed., Springer (1993), p. 72. which does not have well-defined pure-state content.22. See, for example, L. E. Ballentine, Quantum Mechanics: A Modern Development, 2nd ed., World Scientific (2015), chap. 2. In the words of Kurt Gottfried and Tung-Mow Yan, “systems in the real world are rarely in pure states.”33. K. Gottfried, T.-M. Yan, Quantum Mechanics: Fundamentals, 2nd ed., Springer (2003), p. 46.The proper way to discuss a measurement is not using a wavefunction but rather a reduced density matrix. The density matrix of a pure state evolves according to the Liouville–von Neumann equation, which is equivalent to the unitary evolution of the wavefunction by the time-dependent Schrödinger equation. For a subsystem (that is, for any system except the entire universe), the reduced density matrix evolves according to the nonunitary Liouville–von Neumann equation, which has an additional contribution causing decoherence and dissipation.44. See, for example, D. A. Micha, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 80, 394 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-461X(2000)80:3<394::AID-QUA9>3.0.CO;2-U The nature of the measurement—or, more generally, the nature of the subsystem–environment interaction—selects a preferred basis, called the pointer basis, and the subsystem decoheres into an effectively classical mixture in the pointer basis. (See the article by Wojciech Zurek, Physics Today, October 1991, page 36.)ReferencesSection:ChooseTop of pageReferences <<1. A. Bohm, Quantum Mechanics: Foundations and Applications, 3rd ed., Springer (1993), p. 72. Google Scholar2. See, for example, L. E. Ballentine, Quantum Mechanics: A Modern Development, 2nd ed., World Scientific (2015), chap. 2. Google Scholar3. K. Gottfried, T.-M. Yan, Quantum Mechanics: Fundamentals, 2nd ed., Springer (2003), p. 46. Google ScholarCrossref4. See, for example, D. A. Micha, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 80, 394 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-461X(2000)80:3<394::AID-QUA9>3.0.CO;2-U, Google ScholarCrossref© 2022 American Institute of Physics.

Physics Today•Nov 1, 2022•0 citations
It is assumed that in a measurement the system under study interacts with a macroscopic measuring apparatus, in such a way that the density matrix of the measured system evolves according to the Lindblad equation. Under an assumption of nondecreasing von Neumann entropy, conditions on the operators appearing in this equation are given that are necessary and sufficient for the late-time limit of the density matrix to take the form appropriate for a measurement. Where these conditions are satisfied, the Lindblad equation can be solved explicitly. The probabilities appearing in the late-time limit of this general solution are found to agree with the Born rule, and are independent of the details of the operators in the Lindblad equation.
The quantum measurement problem, i.e., the apparent conflict between unitary quantum evolution and non-unitary, stochastic wave-function collapse, remains unresolved a century after the formulation of quantum mechanics. We first review the standard picture, from the Copenhagen prescription with its Heisenberg cut, through von Neumann's movable cut, to environment-induced decoherence, which explains the emergence of stable classical records but still presupposes the Born rule and therefore cannot by itself replace the measurement postulates. We then connect this problem to the Maximum Entropy Principle in two complementary ways. First, decoherence drives the measurement apparatus toward the least biased state compatible with the dynamically protected pointer distribution, so that the emergent collapse may be viewed as a thermodynamic relaxation toward constrained maximum entropy. Second, we propose a Timeless Histories formulation of quantum mechanics in which the primitive objects are ordered sequences of events rather than evolving wave functions. Their conditional probabilities are assigned, relative to specified refinements, by a single Born-Boltzmann rule that combines the quadratic structure of Born's rule with Boltzmann's counting of equally probable microstates. The textbook form of Born's rule, the projection postulate, density operators, and wave functions are then recovered as derived informational constructs, while collapse becomes Bayesian conditioning on recorded events. Time and space enter only subsequently through unitary translation symmetry. Since the probability rule is postulated without reference to any physical collapse or classical observer, the usual circularity of the decoherence program is avoided. Decoherence can then be invoked to explain the stability and approximate additivity of macroscopic records, i.e., the emergence of classicality.
We show that probabilities of results of all possible measurements performing on a quantum system depend on the system's state only through its density matrix. Therefore all experimentally available information about the state contains in the density matrix. In this study, we do not postulate that measurements obey some given formalism (such as observables, positive-operator valued measures, etc.), and do not use Born rule. The process of measurement is considered in a fully operational manner---as an interaction of a measured system with some black-box apparatus. The key point of our approach is the proof that, for improper mixtures, the expected value of any measurement depends linearly on the reduced density function. Such a proof is achieved by considering appropriate thought experiments. We demonstrate that Born rule can be derived as a natural consequence of our results.
An extension of standard quantum mechanics is proposed in which the Newtonian time appearing as a parameter in the unitary evolution operator is replaced with the time shown by a `quantum clock'. Such a clock is defined by the following properties: (a) the time that the clock shows is nondecreasing, (b) the clock ticks at random Newtonian times with random tick sizes, and (c) on average the clock shows the Newtonian time. We show that the leading term in the evolution equation for the density matrix associated with any quantum clock gives the von Neumann equation. The leading correction to the von Neumann equation is given by the Lindblad equation generated by the Hamiltonian, but there are higher-order terms that generalize the von Neumann equation and the Lindblad terms. Modifications to the von Neumann equation are worked out in detail in a parametric family of models for which the tick sizes are gamma distributed. Lower bounds on the parameters of these quantum clock models are derived using the precision limit of an atomic clock. An anomalous term in the Ehrenfest theorem for a free particle is derived, which in principle can be used as a basis for testing such models.
Sean Carroll’s July Quick Study, “Addressing the quantum measurement problem” (page 62), brings up the following question: Does the wavefunction still obey the Schrödinger equation when a measurement is made? A system being measured (or interacting with its environment in any other way) is actually a subsystem, and a subsystem is properly described by a reduced density matrix. The density matrix for an entire system corresponds to a wavefunction—that is, to a pure state—but the density matrix for a subsystem does not necessarily correspond to a wavefunction. The reduced density matrix of a subsystem may correspond to an impure state, also called a mixture or an incoherent combination,11. A. Bohm, Quantum Mechanics: Foundations and Applications, 3rd ed., Springer (1993), p. 72. which does not have well-defined pure-state content.22. See, for example, L. E. Ballentine, Quantum Mechanics: A Modern Development, 2nd ed., World Scientific (2015), chap. 2. In the words of Kurt Gottfried and Tung-Mow Yan, “systems in the real world are rarely in pure states.”33. K. Gottfried, T.-M. Yan, Quantum Mechanics: Fundamentals, 2nd ed., Springer (2003), p. 46.The proper way to discuss a measurement is not using a wavefunction but rather a reduced density matrix. The density matrix of a pure state evolves according to the Liouville–von Neumann equation, which is equivalent to the unitary evolution of the wavefunction by the time-dependent Schrödinger equation. For a subsystem (that is, for any system except the entire universe), the reduced density matrix evolves according to the nonunitary Liouville–von Neumann equation, which has an additional contribution causing decoherence and dissipation.44. See, for example, D. A. Micha, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 80, 394 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-461X(2000)80:3<394::AID-QUA9>3.0.CO;2-U The nature of the measurement—or, more generally, the nature of the subsystem–environment interaction—selects a preferred basis, called the pointer basis, and the subsystem decoheres into an effectively classical mixture in the pointer basis. (See the article by Wojciech Zurek, Physics Today, October 1991, page 36.)ReferencesSection:ChooseTop of pageReferences <<1. A. Bohm, Quantum Mechanics: Foundations and Applications, 3rd ed., Springer (1993), p. 72. Google Scholar2. See, for example, L. E. Ballentine, Quantum Mechanics: A Modern Development, 2nd ed., World Scientific (2015), chap. 2. Google Scholar3. K. Gottfried, T.-M. Yan, Quantum Mechanics: Fundamentals, 2nd ed., Springer (2003), p. 46. Google ScholarCrossref4. See, for example, D. A. Micha, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 80, 394 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-461X(2000)80:3<394::AID-QUA9>3.0.CO;2-U, Google ScholarCrossref© 2022 American Institute of Physics.