The quantum mechanical measurement problem does not arise in the quantum real number approach to quantum measurements of the first kind. The attributes of individual microscopic systems in the experimental ensemble always have qr-number values so the individual systems can be followed throughout the process. The interaction with an apparatus connects the qr-number value of the quantity to be measured with the qr-number value of an attribute of the apparatus that can be locally approximated by a classical number and subsequently amplified to a recordable output.
The quantum mechanical measurement problem does not arise in the quantum real number approach to quantum measurements of the first kind. The attributes of individual microscopic systems in the experimental ensemble always have qr-number values so the individual systems can be followed throughout the process. The interaction with an apparatus connects the qr-number value of the quantity to be measured with the qr-number value of an attribute of the apparatus that can be locally approximated by a classical number and subsequently amplified to a recordable output.
This chapter presents the measurement problem from the point of view of the thermal interpretation of quantum physics. Everything physicists measure is measured in a thermal environment, for which statistical thermodynamics is relevant. The thermal interpretation agrees with how one interprets measurements in thermodynamics, the macroscopic part of quantum physics, derived via statistical mechanics. By its very construction, the thermal interpretation naturally matches the classical properties of our quantum world: The thermal interpretation assigns states-and a realistic interpretation for them-to individual quantum systems, in a way that large quantum systems are naturally described by classical observables. Since measurement devices are large quantum systems, this is the key to solving the measurement problem. We discuss the role played by macroscopic systems and the weak law of large numbers in getting readings with small uncertainty. Since quantum physics makes many deterministic predictions, for example regarding observed spectra, but also assertions about probabilities, we distinguish deterministic and statistical measurements. To clarify the meaning of the concept of measurement, we postulate (in Section 11.1) a measurement principle that defines what it means in the thermal interpretation to measure a quantity with a specified uncertainty. This turns the measurement problem from a philosophical riddle into a scientific problem in the domain of quantum statistical mechanics, namely how the quantum dynamics correlates macroscopic readings from an instrument with properties of the state of a measured microscopic system. The essence of scientific practice is the reproducibility of measurements, discussed in Section 11.2. Unlike in traditional interpretations, single, nonreproducible observations do not count as measurements, since this would violate the reproducibility of measurements-the essence of scientific practice. As a consequence, the measurement of a Hermitian quantity A is regarded as giving an uncertain value approximating the q-expectation {A} rather than (as tradition wanted to have it) as an exact revelation of an eigenvalue of A. This difference is most conspicuous in the interpretation of single discrete microscopic events. Except in very special circumstances, these are not reproducible. Thus, they have no scientific value in themselves and do not constitute measurement results. Scientific value is, however, in ensembles of such observations, which result in approximate measurements of q-probabilities and q-expectations. Sections 11.3 and 11.4 distinguish deterministic and statistical measurements, depending on whether a single observation is reproducible, and discuss the role played by macroscopic systems and the weak law of large numbers in getting readings with small uncertainty. How to measure the q-probabilities of events, described in terms of POVMs, is discussed in Section 11.5. Section 11.6 poses the measurement problem as a problem of the statistical mechanics of measurement devices, and discuss recent work by Allahverdyan, Balian, and Nieuwenhuizen on its resolution. Section 11.7 discusses the problem how, in the thermal interpretation, discrete events can arise, although qexpectations are by their very nature continuous. This is resolved by pointing to work by Breuer and Petruccione on piecewise deterministic processes (PDP). Section 11.8 sheds additional light on the origin of discrete events by an analysis of the role dissipative bistability plays in obtaining discreteness in classical physics.
The foundations of quantum mechanics are reconsidered in relation to the measurement problem. We define two kinds of quantities. The type A quantities are observables obtained experimentally from a single measurement. A dynamical variable is a type A quantity whose measurement selects a set of eigenvalues (EVs) as c-numbers. The type B quantities represent theoretical quantities related to probabilities. State vectors, the wave function, and the probability distribution (PD) are type B quantities. They are derived from an eigenvalue equation such as the Schrödinger equation. A quantum jump (QJ) is the measurement of a dynamical variable to select a set of EVs. The wave function is a theoretical quantity that persists throughout an experiment and therefore does not collapse. After a QJ, a selected set of EVs persists until it becomes macroscopic. However, an eigenstate is a theoretical notion irrelevant to a single measurement and does not exist in reality after a QJ. One experiment is complete when an ensemble of EVs has been obtained and compared with the theoretically predicted PD. To obtain an ensemble, repeated measurements are required in general, but there are some exceptions, like a Bose-Einstein condensate system, for which a single measurement yields a real ensemble.
The foundations of quantum mechanics are reconsidered in relation to the measurement problem. We define two kinds of quantities. The type A quantities are observables obtained experimentally from a single measurement. A dynamical variable is a type A quantity whose measurement selects a set of eigenvalues (EVs) as c-numbers. The type B quantities represent theoretical quantities related to probabilities. State vectors, the wave function, and the probability distribution (PD) are type B quantities. They are derived from an eigenvalue equation such as the Schrödinger equation. A quantum jump (QJ) is the measurement of a dynamical variable to select a set of EVs. The wave function is a theoretical quantity that persists throughout an experiment and therefore does not collapse. After a QJ, a selected set of EVs persists until it becomes macroscopic. However, an eigenstate is a theoretical notion irrelevant to a single measurement and does not exist in reality after a QJ. One experiment is complete when an ensemble of EVs has been obtained and compared with the theoretically predicted PD. To obtain an ensemble, repeated measurements are required in general, but there are some exceptions, like a Bose-Einstein condensate system, for which a single measurement yields a real ensemble. We comment on the relation between the reality of the wave function and the derivation of non-relativistic quantum mechanics from relativistic quantum field theory.
Foundations of quantum mechanics are reconsidered in relation to the measurement problem. We define two kinds of quantities. The type A quantities are observables obtained experimentally from a single measurement. A dynamical variable is a type A quantity whose measurement selects a set of eigenvalues (EVs) as c-numbers. The type B quantities represent theoretical quantities related to probabilities. State vectors, wave function, and the probability distribution (PD) are type B quantities. They are derived from an eigenvalue equation such as Schrödinger equation. A quantum jump (QJ) is the measurement of a dynamical variable to select a set of EVs. The wave function is a theoretical quantity which persists throughout an experiment and therefore it does not collapse. After a QJ, a selected set of EVs persists until it becomes macroscopic. However, an eigenstate is a theoretical notion irrelevant to a single measurement and it does not exist in reality after a QJ. One experiment is complete when an ensemble of EVs has been obtained and compared with the theoretically predicted PD. To obtain an ensemble, repeated measurements are required in general, but there are some exceptions like a Bose-Einstein condensate system for which a single measurement yields a real ensemble. We discuss the relation between the reality of the wave function and the derivation of non-relativistic quantum mechanics from quantum field theory.
Foundations of quantum mechanics are reconsidered in relation to the measurement problem. We define two kinds of quantities. The type A quantities are observables obtained experimentally from a single measurement. A dynamical variable is a type A quantity whose measurement selects a set of eigenvalues (EVs) as c-numbers. The type B quantities represent theoretical quantities related to probabilities. State vectors, wave function, and the probability distribution (PD) are type B quantities. They are derived from an eigenvalue equation such as Schrödinger equation. A quantum jump (QJ) is the measurement of a dynamical variable to select a set of EVs. The wave function is a theoretical quantity which persists throughout an experiment and therefore it does not collapse. After a QJ, a selected set of EVs persists until it becomes macroscopic. However, an eigenstate is a theoretical notion irrelevant to a single measurement and it does not exist in reality after a QJ. One experiment is complete when an ensemble of EVs has been obtained and compared with the theoretically predicted PD. To obtain an ensemble, repeated measurements are required in general, but there are some exceptions like a Bose-Einstein condensate system for which a single measurement yields a real ensemble. We discuss the relation between the reality of the wave function and the derivation of non-relativistic quantum mechanics from quantum field theory.
MEASUREMENT INTERACTIONS In the present interpretation terms such as ‘measurement,’ ‘observation,’ ‘find,’ ‘classical,’ and ‘apparatus’ do not appear in the formulation of quantum mechanics. Yet it must of course be true that quantum mechanics can be used to predict features of the results of measurements – in particular their statistics. What is required, then, is an account in quantum mechanical terms of those physical interactions capable of being used to perform measurements of quantum dynamical variables, from which it follows that the predicted probabilities for specified behavior of certain quantum systems in these interactions coincide with what, on a more conventional interpretation, are simply postulated as the quantum mechanical probabilities for various measurement results on a system with a given quantum state. It is necessary to see how this consequence may be derived, not only in order to explicate the Born rules, but also to explain the role of quantum states within the present interpretation. The first step toward the required account is to analyze the nature of an interaction capable of being used to perform a measurement of the value of a quantum dynamical variable in a quantum system. Any such interaction will be called an M -type interaction, whether or not it is in fact used to perform a measurement. The basic characteristic of an M -type interaction is that it establishes a correlation between the initial dynamical state of one quantum system σ (the object system) and the final dynamical state of another quantum system α (the apparatus system).