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:1704.02285

Reply to Comment on "Quantum mechanics for non-inertial observers"

Toro\v{s}, Marko, Gro{\ss}ardt, Andr\'e, Angelo Bassi

Published Apr 7, 2017• 2 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Our recent paper (arXiv:1701.04298 [quant-ph]) discussed the occurrence of a coupling of centre of mass and internal degrees of freedom for complex quantum systems in non-inertial frames. There, we pointed out that an external force supporting the system against gravity plays a crucial role for the coupling between center of mass position to the internal degrees of freedom. In a comment (arXiv:1702.06670 [quant-ph]) to our paper, Pikovski et al. question our conclusion and present the argument that the lack of the coupling term would be in contradiction with the observation of gravitational time dilation using atomic clocks. Here, we elaborate on our results in reply to their criticism and clarify why our arguments remain valid.

Related papers

Quantum mechanics for non-inertial observers

Marko Toroš, André Großardt, Angelo Bassi

A recent analysis by Pikovski et al. [Nat. Phys. 11, 668 (2015)] has triggered interest in the question of how to include relativistic corrections in the quantum dynamics governing many-particle systems in a gravitational field. Here we show how the center-of-mass motion of a quantum system subject to gravity can be derived more rigorously, addressing the ambiguous definition of relativistic center-of-mass coordinates. We further demonstrate that, contrary to the prediction by Pikovski et al., external forces play a crucial role in the relativistic coupling of internal and external degrees of freedom, resulting in a complete cancellation of the alleged coupling in Earth-bound laboratories for systems supported against gravity by an external force. We conclude that the proposed decoherence effect is an effect of relative acceleration between quantum system and measurement device, rather than a universal effect in gravitational fields.

arXiv:1701.04298•Jan 16, 2017•5 citations

Comment on "Quantum mechanics for non-inertial observers"

Igor Pikovski, Magdalena Zych, Fabio Costa +1 more

In a recent paper (arXiv:1701.04298 [quant-ph]) Toroš, Großardt and Bassi claim that the potential necessary to support a composite particle in a gravitational field must necessarily cancel the relativistic coupling between internal and external degrees of freedom. As such a coupling is responsible for the gravitational redshift measured in numerous experiments, the above statement is clearly incorrect. We identify the simple mistake in the paper responsible for the incorrect claim.

arXiv:1702.06670•Feb 22, 2017•2 citations

Time Dilation in Quantum Systems and Decoherence: Questions and Answers

Igor Pikovski, Magdalena Zych, Fabio Costa +1 more

Recent work has shown that relativistic time dilation results in correlations between a particle's internal and external degrees of freedom, leading to decoherence of the latter. In this note, we briefly summarize the results and address the comments and concerns that have been raised towards these findings. In addition to brief replies to the comments, we provide a pedagogical discussion of some of the underlying principles of the work. This note serves to clarify some of the counterintuitive aspects arising when the two theories are jointly considered.

arXiv:1508.03296•Aug 13, 2015•8 citations

Brief reply to "Can gravity account for the emergence of classicality?"

Igor Pikovski, Magdalena Zych, Fabio Costa +1 more

In a series of comments, Bonder et al. criticized our work on decoherence due to time dilation [Nature Physics 11, 668-672 (2015)]. First the authors erroneously claimed that our results contradict the equivalence principle, only to "resolve" the alleged conflict in a second note. The resolution - relativity of simultaneity - was already explained in our reply [arXiv:1508.03296], which Bonder et al. now essentially reiterate. The newly raised points were also already extensively clarified in our note. The physical prediction of our work remains valid: systems with internal dynamics decohere if the superposed paths have different proper times.

arXiv:1509.07767•Sep 24, 2015•1 citation

Reply to Comment on ``Time-dependent quasi-Hermitian Hamiltonians and the unitary quantum evolution''

Miloslav Znojil

In his fresh "Comment" (arXiv:0711.0137v1), A. Mostafazadeh reacts on my very recent letter (arXiv:0710.5653v1) where I tried to clarify certain misunderstandings which occurred in A. M., Phys. Lett. B \textbf{650}, 208 (2007) [arXiv:0706.1872v2, "Paper"]. As long as the "Comment" offers a new support of the original assertions made in the "Paper", I feel obliged to re-clarify the matter by extending my argumentation. I insist that it is possible to escape the main conclusion of the "Paper", indeed. In particular, I point out a gap in the new calculations in "Comment", add a few remarks on the notation and reconfirm that the unitarity of the time-evolution DOES NOT require the time-independence of the metric operator.

arXiv:0711.0514•Nov 5, 2007•6 citations

Reply to the Comment on ‘Quantum principle of relativity’

Andrzej Dragan, ARTUR K. EKERT

Abstract We discuss critical remarks raised by Horodecki (2023 arXiv: 2301.07802 [quant-ph]) toward our work on the connection between superluminal extension of special relativity and fundamental aspects of quantum theory.

New Journal of Physics•Nov 27, 2023•4 citations
Our recent paper (arXiv:1701.04298 [quant-ph]) discussed the occurrence of a coupling of centre of mass and internal degrees of freedom for complex quantum systems in non-inertial frames. There, we pointed out that an external force supporting the system against gravity plays a crucial role for the coupling between center of mass position to the internal degrees of freedom. In a comment (arXiv:1702.06670 [quant-ph]) to our paper, Pikovski et al. question our conclusion and present the argument that the lack of the coupling term would be in contradiction with the observation of gravitational time dilation using atomic clocks. Here, we elaborate on our results in reply to their criticism and clarify why our arguments remain valid.
A recent analysis by Pikovski et al. [Nat. Phys. 11, 668 (2015)] has triggered interest in the question of how to include relativistic corrections in the quantum dynamics governing many-particle systems in a gravitational field. Here we show how the center-of-mass motion of a quantum system subject to gravity can be derived more rigorously, addressing the ambiguous definition of relativistic center-of-mass coordinates. We further demonstrate that, contrary to the prediction by Pikovski et al., external forces play a crucial role in the relativistic coupling of internal and external degrees of freedom, resulting in a complete cancellation of the alleged coupling in Earth-bound laboratories for systems supported against gravity by an external force. We conclude that the proposed decoherence effect is an effect of relative acceleration between quantum system and measurement device, rather than a universal effect in gravitational fields.
Recent work has shown that relativistic time dilation results in correlations between a particle's internal and external degrees of freedom, leading to decoherence of the latter. In this note, we briefly summarize the results and address the comments and concerns that have been raised towards these findings. In addition to brief replies to the comments, we provide a pedagogical discussion of some of the underlying principles of the work. This note serves to clarify some of the counterintuitive aspects arising when the two theories are jointly considered.
In a series of comments, Bonder et al. criticized our work on decoherence due to time dilation [Nature Physics 11, 668-672 (2015)]. First the authors erroneously claimed that our results contradict the equivalence principle, only to "resolve" the alleged conflict in a second note. The resolution - relativity of simultaneity - was already explained in our reply [arXiv:1508.03296], which Bonder et al. now essentially reiterate. The newly raised points were also already extensively clarified in our note. The physical prediction of our work remains valid: systems with internal dynamics decohere if the superposed paths have different proper times.
In his fresh "Comment" (arXiv:0711.0137v1), A. Mostafazadeh reacts on my very recent letter (arXiv:0710.5653v1) where I tried to clarify certain misunderstandings which occurred in A. M., Phys. Lett. B \textbf{650}, 208 (2007) [arXiv:0706.1872v2, "Paper"]. As long as the "Comment" offers a new support of the original assertions made in the "Paper", I feel obliged to re-clarify the matter by extending my argumentation. I insist that it is possible to escape the main conclusion of the "Paper", indeed. In particular, I point out a gap in the new calculations in "Comment", add a few remarks on the notation and reconfirm that the unitarity of the time-evolution DOES NOT require the time-independence of the metric operator.