I show that the application of the quantum-mechanical (QM) which-way weak measurement scheme of Vaidman may lead to logical inconsistencies. To this end, I study weak values of projection operators. Weak values are (normalized) amplitudes, operationally defined by a weak measurement followed by postselection. Projector weak values have a direct physical significance. This allows formulating an inconsistency in classical terms, viz., the contradiction in the readings of several measuring devices. To arrive at the contradiction, I also invoke the property of weak measurements not to collapse the wave function but to leave the state of the system unchanged (to lowest order in the weak measurement strength). My arguments rely entirely on basic QM rules plus commonly accepted weak QM measurement approximations. Therefore, the inconsistency challenges QM as such.
I show that the application of the quantum-mechanical (QM) which-way weak measurement scheme of Vaidman may lead to logical inconsistencies. To this end, I study weak values of projection operators. Weak values are (normalized) amplitudes, operationally defined by a weak measurement followed by postselection. Projector weak values have a direct physical significance. This allows formulating an inconsistency in classical terms, viz., the contradiction in the readings of several measuring devices. To arrive at the contradiction, I also invoke the property of weak measurements not to collapse the wave function but to leave the state of the system unchanged (to lowest order in the weak measurement strength). My arguments rely entirely on basic QM rules plus commonly accepted weak QM measurement approximations. Therefore, the inconsistency challenges QM as such.
In their paper (arXiv:2402.09879), Aredes and Saldanha analyze several paradoxes related to weak values and present a "general argument" that aims to show that "realistic interpretations ...of weak values lead to inconsistencies". Although we agree with the identified inconsistencies for the specific weak values analyzed there, in this Comment we demonstrate that the origin of these inconsistencies is not their general argument, which is formally incorrect. We use Bohmian mechanics as a counterexample to confirm that their conclusions are not valid for all weak values and quantum theories. In particular, we show that weak values postselected in position can in fact be interpreted within Bohmian mechanics as properties of quantum systems, detached from any measuring devices, in a consistent and meaningful way.
Quantum mechanical weak values of projection operators have been used to answer which-way questions, e . g . to trace which arms in a multiple Mach–Zehnder setup a particle may have traversed from a given initial to a prescribed final state. I show that this procedure might lead to logical inconsistencies in the sense that different methods used to answer composite questions, like “Has the particle traversed the way X or the way Y ?”, may result in different answers depending on which methods are used to find the answer. I illustrate the problem by considering some examples: the “quantum pigeonhole” framework of Aharonov et al. , the three-box problem, and Hardy’s paradox. To prepare the ground for my main conclusion on the incompatibility in certain cases of weak values and logic, I study the corresponding situation for strong/projective measurements. In this case, no logical inconsistencies occur provided one is always careful in specifying exactly to which ensemble or sample space one refers. My results cast doubts on the utility of quantum weak values in treating cases like the examples mentioned.
A so called “weak value” of an observable in quantum mechanics (QM) may be obtained in a weak measurement + post-selection procedure on the QM system under study. Applied to number operators, it has been invoked in revisiting some QM paradoxes ( e.g. , the so called Three-Box Paradox and Hardy’s Paradox). This requires the weak value to be interpreted as a bona fide property of the system considered, a par with entities like operator mean values and eigenvalues. I question such an interpretation; it has no support in the basic axioms of quantum mechanics and it leads to unreasonable results in concrete situations.
Interest in weak values has grown steadily since their introduction in 1988, driven by developments in quantum measurement theory and increasing attention to the foundational issues at the heart of quantum mechanics. This thesis undertakes a philosophical investigation into the nature and implications of weak values, with a particular focus on their interpretation and role in creating and resolving quantum paradoxes. Overall, we argue that sequential weak values offer novel conceptual tools for assessing logical consistency in an atemporal fashion, ultimately motivating a shift toward a fundamentally relation-based ontology. Chapter 1 begins by establishing the conceptual and philosophical foundations of the thesis. We argue that performing this conceptual analysis of weak values requires a philosophical methodology informed by the structure of quantum theory and the foundational questions it poses. In Chapter 2, we provide a critical exploration of weak measurement theory and weak values, outlining their historical foundations and development, the experimental context, and interpretative challenges. Through a detailed analysis of paradoxes related to weak values such as the nested interferometer and the quantum Cheshire cat, the chapter argues that weak values reveal spatiotemporally discontinuous trajectories which conflict with classical intuition about particles and their trajectories. We contend that weak values are inherently contextual, as their significance arises in the context of the pre- and post- selections of the system. Chapter 3 develops an original account of ‘particle presence' across time, building on metaphysical notions of persistence. This chapter proposes a way of recovering continuity in paradoxes such as the three-box gendankenexperiment. Our framework offers a means of assessing the persistence of particles through spacetime via sequential weak values which we argue test the logical consistency of propositions across time. We then explore the implications for temporality, developing the key argument of this chapter: presence is defined across durations of time, rather than in discrete spacetime. This raises the possibility of presence without a well-defined causal order. In Chapter 4, the insights developed in the previous chapters are extended to a consideration of Relational Quantum Mechanics (RQM), addressing the longstanding issue of a lack of intersubjective agreement in relational interpretations. Given RQM's rejection of absolutism, this chapter critiques existing attempts at bridging perspectives and proposes a new route to empirical confirmation grounded in the persistence and reliability of observer's memory records. Our two- step model, consisting of internal confirmation via sequential weak values and then a consistency check from a second observer, offers a new approach to confirmation in RQM without rejecting the non-absolutist core of the interpretation. Sequential weak values are re-interpreted as atemporal probes available to the informational observer, distinct from its physical counterpart. This atemporal nature allows them to establish logical consistency across the observer's records and assign credence to them without presupposing a classical temporal order. These results suggest an ontology grounded in primitive relations, rather than one built on temporally ordered events. Chapter 4 thus builds on the contextuality arguments of earlier chapters: just as weak values reveal measurement outcomes to be context-dependent, their sequential and time-symmetric structure exposes temporal contextuality, challenging classical assumptions about fixed causal order and reinforcing the case for a non-classical, relation-based ontology. Finally, in Chapter 5, we conclude by summarising our key results and giving a list of open questions.
Summary form only given. Measurements are the very basis of Physics, especially in Quantum Mechanics, where they assume even a more fundamental role because of wave function collapse after a “strong” (projective) measurement. Furthermore, measuring a quantum-mechanical observable completely erases the information on its conjugate one (e.g. measurement of position erases information on momentum, and vice-versa). Nevertheless, in Quantum Mechanics other kinds of measurement are possible. For example, wave function collapse can be overcome through Weak Measurements, i.e. measurements performed with an interaction sufficiently weak not to collapse the original state, featuring several interesting properties. An example of these are weak values [1-3], realised for the first time in [4-6], that have been used for addressing fundamental questions [7-12] as Contextuality and are also a tool for Quantum Metrology [13-19]. One of the most intriguing properties of Weak Measurements is that, since they are not affected by wave function collapse, they can allow gathering simultaneous information on non-commuting observables [20], impossible with the standard (projective) measurement protocols. A second example is offered by Protective Measurements [21], a new technique able to extract information on the expectation value of an observable even measuring a single particle. In this talk, after a general introduction to WMs, we present the first realisation of sequential weak value measurements [22], i.e. a joint measurement of the weak value of (incompatible) polarizations on a single photon. Then, we present an experiment addressed to explore the connection between anomalous weak values and Contextuality [23], showing a clear violation of the inequality proposed in [12] while satisfying all the additional theoretical requests, unequivocally demonstrating the contextual nature of weak values. Finally, we present and discuss the first implementation of Protective Measurements, showing unprecedented measurement capability and demonstrating how the expectation value of an observable can be obtained with a single measurement on a single particle.
Despite being very influential on both foundations and applications of quantum mechanics, weak values are still somewhat controversial. Although there are some indications that weak values are physical properties of a single quantum system, the common way weak values are presented is statistical: it is commonly believed that for measuring weak values one has to perform many weak measurements over a large ensemble of pre- and postselected particles. Other debates surround the anomalous nature of weak value and even their quantumness. To address these issues, we present some preliminary data showing that anomalous weak values can be measured using just a single detection, i.e. with no statistics. In our experiment, a single click of a detector indicates the weak value as a single photon property, which moreover lies well beyond the range of eigenvelues of the measured operator. Importantly, the uncertainty with which the weak values is measured is smaller than the difference between the weak value and the closet eigenvalue. This is the first experimental realization of robust weak measurements.