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:2009.12642 · Nature Communications

Retrodiction beyond the Heisenberg uncertainty relation

Han Bao, Shenchao Jin, Junlei Duan, Suotang Jia, Klaus Mølmer, Heng Shen, Yanhong Xiao

Published Nov 9, 2020• 26 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Abstract In quantum mechanics, the Heisenberg uncertainty relation presents an ultimate limit to the precision by which one can predict the outcome of position and momentum measurements on a particle. Heisenberg explicitly stated this relation for the prediction of “hypothetical future measurements”, and it does not describe the situation where knowledge is available about the system both earlier and later than the time of the measurement. Here, we study what happens under such circumstances with an atomic ensemble containing 1011 rubidium atoms, initiated nearly in the ground state in the presence of a magnetic field. The collective spin observables of the atoms are then well described by canonical position and momentum observables, $${\hat{x}}_{\text{A}}$$ x ̂ A and $${\hat{p}}_{\text{A}}$$ p ̂ A that satisfy $$[{\hat{x}}_{\text{A}},{\hat{p}}_{\text{A}}]=i\hslash$$ [ x ̂ A , p ̂ A ] = i ℏ . Quantum non-demolition measurements of $${\hat{p}}_{\text{A}}$$ p ̂ A before and of $${\hat{x}}_{\text{A}}$$ x ̂ A after time t allow precise estimates of both observables at time t. By means of the past quantum state formalism, we demonstrate that outcomes of measurements of both the $${\hat{x}}_{\text{A}}$$ x ̂ A and $${\hat{p}}_{A}$$ p ̂ A observables can be inferred with errors below the standard quantum limit. The capability of assigning precise values to multiple observables and to observe their variation during physical processes may have implications in quantum state estimation and sensing.

DOI
10.1038/s41467-020-19495-1

Related papers

Retrodiction beyond the Heisenberg uncertainty relation

Han Bao, Shenchao Jin, Junlei Duan +4 more

Abstract In quantum mechanics, the Heisenberg uncertainty relation presents an ultimate limit to the precision by which one can predict the outcome of position and momentum measurements on a particle. Heisenberg explicitly stated this relation for the prediction of “hypothetical future measurements”, and it does not describe the situation where knowledge is available about the system both earlier and later than the time of the measurement. Here, we study what happens under such circumstances with an atomic ensemble containing 1011 rubidium atoms, initiated nearly in the ground state in the presence of a magnetic field. The collective spin observables of the atoms are then well described by canonical position and momentum observables, $${\hat{x}}_{\text{A}}$$ x ̂ A and $${\hat{p}}_{\text{A}}$$ p ̂ A that satisfy $$[{\hat{x}}_{\text{A}}, {\hat{p}}_{\text{A}}]=i\hslash$$ [ x ̂ A , p ̂ A ] = i ℏ . Quantum non-demolition measurements of $${\hat{p}}_{\text{A}}$$ p ̂ A before and of $${\hat{x}}_{\text{A}}$$ x ̂ A after time t allow precise estimates of both observables at time t. By means of the past quantum state formalism, we demonstrate that outcomes of measurements of both the $${\hat{x}}_{\text{A}}$$ x ̂ A and $${\hat{p}}_{A}$$ p ̂ A observables can be inferred with errors below the standard quantum limit. The capability of assigning precise values to multiple observables and to observe their variation during physical processes may have implications in quantum state estimation and sensing.

•Jan 1, 2020•23 citations

Guessing the outcome of separate and joint quantum measurements of noncommuting observables

Maryam Khanahmadi, Klaus Mølmer

According to Heisenberg's uncertainty relation, there is an ultimate limit to how precisely we may predict the outcome of position and momentum measurements on a quantum system. We show that this limit may be violated by an arbitrarily large factor if one aims, instead, to guess the unknown value of a past measurement. For experiments on a single quantum system, the precise assignment of past position and momentum measurement outcomes is accompanied by large uncertainty about their linear combinations, while we show that entanglement with an ancillary system permits accurate retrodiction of any such linear combination. Finally, we show that the outcomes of experiments that jointly measure multiple linear combinations of position and momentum observables by means of ancillary probe particles can also be guessed with no formal lower limit. We present quantitative results for projective measurements and for generalized measurements where all components are prepared in Gaussian states.

arXiv:2103.16338•Physical Review A•Aug 9, 2021•10 citations

Spin-squeezing by prediction and retrodiction measurements: beyond the Heisenberg uncertainty relation

Han Bao, Shenchao Jin, Junlei Duan +11 more

If one has access to information about a quantum system both before and after a measurement, the usual remit of Heisenberg uncertainty relation (HUR) does not apply. Here, we theoretically and experimentally demonstrate that, in such a scenario, one can retrodict position and momentum measurements without being limited by HUR. The experiment uses a large ensemble of 10^11 atoms in a macroscopic vapor cell, and the results may be applicable for quantum state estimation and sensing, especially for sensitive magnetometers equally capable of measuring the amplitude and phase of an RF magnetic field both below the standard quantum limit.

Optical and Quantum Sensing and Precision Metrology•Mar 4, 2021•0 citations

The Theory of Quantum Uncertainties and Quantum Measurements

Harsh Anand

1) We shall discuss what modern interpretations say about the Heisenberg's uncertainties. These interpretations explain that a quantity begins to 'lose' meaning when a conjugate property begins to 'acquire' definite meaning. We know that a quantity losing meaning means that it has no fixed value and has an uncertainty . In this paper we look deeper into this interpretation and the outcome reveals more evidence of the quantity losing meaning. Newer insights appear. 2) We consider two extreme cases of hypothetical processes nature undergoes, without interference by a measurement: One, a system collapses to an energy eigenstate under the influence of a Hamiltonian instantaneously at a time $t$. This is thus what would happen if we would measure the system's energy. Next, when a particle becomes localised to a point at a time $t_0$ under the influence of a Hamiltonian. This is thus what would happen if we would measure the system's position. We shall prove that both these situations cannot arise under ordinary circumstances and thus measurement processes cannot be modelled by physical Hamiltonians.

•Oct 31, 2022•0 citations

The Precision Limits in a Single-Event Quantum Measurement of Electron Momentum and Position

H. Schmidt‐Böcking, S. Eckart, Hans Jürgen Lüdde +2 more

Abstract A modern state-of-the-art “quantum measurement” [The term “quantum measurement” as used here implies that parameters of atomic particles are measured that emerge from a single scattering process of quantum particles.] of momentum and position of a single electron at a given time [“at a given time” means directly after the scattering process. (It should be noticed that the duration of the reaction process is typically extremely short => attoseconds).] and the precision limits for their experimental determination are discussed from an experimentalists point of view. We show—by giving examples of actually performed experiments—that in a single reaction between quantum particles at a given time only the momenta of the emitted particles but not their positions can be measured with sub-atomic resolution. This fundamental disparity between the conjugate variables of momentum and position is due to the fact that during a single-event measurement only the total momentum but not position is conserved as function of time. We highlight, that (other than prevalently perceived) Heisenberg’s “Uncertainty Relation” UR [1] does not limit the achievable resolution of momentum in a single-event measurement. Thus, Heisenberg’s statement that in a single-event measurement only either the position or the momentum (velocity) of a quantum particle can be measured with high precision contradicts a real experiment. The UR states only a correlation between the mean statistical fluctuations of a large number of repeated single-event measurements of two conjugate variables. A detailed discussion of the real measurement process and its precision with respect to momentum and position is presented.

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 2021•2 citations

Quantum Measurement Bounds beyond the Uncertainty Relations

Vittorio Giovannetti, Seth Lloyd, Lorenzo Maccone

In quantum mechanics, the Heisenberg uncertainty relations and the Cramér-Rao inequalities typically limit the precision in the estimation of a parameter through the standard deviation of a conjugate observable. Here we extend these relations by giving a bound to the precision of a parameter in terms of the expectation value of the conjugate observable. This has both foundational and practical consequences: in quantum optics it resolves a controversy over which is the ultimate precision in interferometry.

arXiv:1109.5661•Physical Review Letters•Jun 26, 2012•70 citations
Abstract In quantum mechanics, the Heisenberg uncertainty relation presents an ultimate limit to the precision by which one can predict the outcome of position and momentum measurements on a particle. Heisenberg explicitly stated this relation for the prediction of “hypothetical future measurements”, and it does not describe the situation where knowledge is available about the system both earlier and later than the time of the measurement. Here, we study what happens under such circumstances with an atomic ensemble containing 1011 rubidium atoms, initiated nearly in the ground state in the presence of a magnetic field. The collective spin observables of the atoms are then well described by canonical position and momentum observables, x^A{\hat{x}}_{\text{A}}x^A​ x ̂ A and p^A{\hat{p}}_{\text{A}}p^​A​ p ̂ A that satisfy [x^A,p^A]=iℏ[{\hat{x}}_{\text{A}},{\hat{p}}_{\text{A}}]=i\hslash[x^A​,p^​A​]=iℏ [ x ̂ A , p ̂ A ] = i ℏ . Quantum non-demolition measurements of p^A{\hat{p}}_{\text{A}}p^​A​ p ̂ A before and of x^A{\hat{x}}_{\text{A}}x^A​ x ̂ A after time t allow precise estimates of both observables at time t. By means of the past quantum state formalism, we demonstrate that outcomes of measurements of both the x^A{\hat{x}}_{\text{A}}x^A​ x ̂ A and p^A{\hat{p}}_{A}p^​A​ p ̂ A observables can be inferred with errors below the standard quantum limit. The capability of assigning precise values to multiple observables and to observe their variation during physical processes may have implications in quantum state estimation and sensing.
Abstract In quantum mechanics, the Heisenberg uncertainty relation presents an ultimate limit to the precision by which one can predict the outcome of position and momentum measurements on a particle. Heisenberg explicitly stated this relation for the prediction of “hypothetical future measurements”, and it does not describe the situation where knowledge is available about the system both earlier and later than the time of the measurement. Here, we study what happens under such circumstances with an atomic ensemble containing 1011 rubidium atoms, initiated nearly in the ground state in the presence of a magnetic field. The collective spin observables of the atoms are then well described by canonical position and momentum observables, x^A{\hat{x}}_{\text{A}}x^A​ x ̂ A and p^A{\hat{p}}_{\text{A}}p^​A​ p ̂ A that satisfy [x^A,p^A]=iℏ[{\hat{x}}_{\text{A}}, {\hat{p}}_{\text{A}}]=i\hslash[x^A​,p^​A​]=iℏ [ x ̂ A , p ̂ A ] = i ℏ . Quantum non-demolition measurements of p^A{\hat{p}}_{\text{A}}p^​A​ p ̂ A before and of x^A{\hat{x}}_{\text{A}}x^A​ x ̂ A after time t allow precise estimates of both observables at time t. By means of the past quantum state formalism, we demonstrate that outcomes of measurements of both the x^A{\hat{x}}_{\text{A}}x^A​ x ̂ A and p^A{\hat{p}}_{A}p^​A​ p ̂ A observables can be inferred with errors below the standard quantum limit. The capability of assigning precise values to multiple observables and to observe their variation during physical processes may have implications in quantum state estimation and sensing.
According to Heisenberg's uncertainty relation, there is an ultimate limit to how precisely we may predict the outcome of position and momentum measurements on a quantum system. We show that this limit may be violated by an arbitrarily large factor if one aims, instead, to guess the unknown value of a past measurement. For experiments on a single quantum system, the precise assignment of past position and momentum measurement outcomes is accompanied by large uncertainty about their linear combinations, while we show that entanglement with an ancillary system permits accurate retrodiction of any such linear combination. Finally, we show that the outcomes of experiments that jointly measure multiple linear combinations of position and momentum observables by means of ancillary probe particles can also be guessed with no formal lower limit. We present quantitative results for projective measurements and for generalized measurements where all components are prepared in Gaussian states.
If one has access to information about a quantum system both before and after a measurement, the usual remit of Heisenberg uncertainty relation (HUR) does not apply. Here, we theoretically and experimentally demonstrate that, in such a scenario, one can retrodict position and momentum measurements without being limited by HUR. The experiment uses a large ensemble of 10^11 atoms in a macroscopic vapor cell, and the results may be applicable for quantum state estimation and sensing, especially for sensitive magnetometers equally capable of measuring the amplitude and phase of an RF magnetic field both below the standard quantum limit.
1) We shall discuss what modern interpretations say about the Heisenberg's uncertainties. These interpretations explain that a quantity begins to 'lose' meaning when a conjugate property begins to 'acquire' definite meaning. We know that a quantity losing meaning means that it has no fixed value and has an uncertainty . In this paper we look deeper into this interpretation and the outcome reveals more evidence of the quantity losing meaning. Newer insights appear. 2) We consider two extreme cases of hypothetical processes nature undergoes, without interference by a measurement: One, a system collapses to an energy eigenstate under the influence of a Hamiltonian instantaneously at a time ttt. This is thus what would happen if we would measure the system's energy. Next, when a particle becomes localised to a point at a time t0t_0t0​ under the influence of a Hamiltonian. This is thus what would happen if we would measure the system's position. We shall prove that both these situations cannot arise under ordinary circumstances and thus measurement processes cannot be modelled by physical Hamiltonians.
Abstract A modern state-of-the-art “quantum measurement” [The term “quantum measurement” as used here implies that parameters of atomic particles are measured that emerge from a single scattering process of quantum particles.] of momentum and position of a single electron at a given time [“at a given time” means directly after the scattering process. (It should be noticed that the duration of the reaction process is typically extremely short => attoseconds).] and the precision limits for their experimental determination are discussed from an experimentalists point of view. We show—by giving examples of actually performed experiments—that in a single reaction between quantum particles at a given time only the momenta of the emitted particles but not their positions can be measured with sub-atomic resolution. This fundamental disparity between the conjugate variables of momentum and position is due to the fact that during a single-event measurement only the total momentum but not position is conserved as function of time. We highlight, that (other than prevalently perceived) Heisenberg’s “Uncertainty Relation” UR [1] does not limit the achievable resolution of momentum in a single-event measurement. Thus, Heisenberg’s statement that in a single-event measurement only either the position or the momentum (velocity) of a quantum particle can be measured with high precision contradicts a real experiment. The UR states only a correlation between the mean statistical fluctuations of a large number of repeated single-event measurements of two conjugate variables. A detailed discussion of the real measurement process and its precision with respect to momentum and position is presented.
In quantum mechanics, the Heisenberg uncertainty relations and the Cramér-Rao inequalities typically limit the precision in the estimation of a parameter through the standard deviation of a conjugate observable. Here we extend these relations by giving a bound to the precision of a parameter in terms of the expectation value of the conjugate observable. This has both foundational and practical consequences: in quantum optics it resolves a controversy over which is the ultimate precision in interferometry.