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:2108.08342

Conserved Quantities and Measurements

Edward J. Gillis

Published Aug 18, 2021• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

When a measurement is made on a system that is not in an eigenstate of the measured observable, it is often assumed that some conservation law has been violated. Discussions of the effect of measurements on conserved quantities often overlook the possibility of entanglement between the measured system and the preparation apparatus. The preparation of a system in any particular state necessarily involves interaction between the apparatus and the system. Since entanglement is a generic result of interaction, as shown by Gemmer and Mahler[1], and by Durt[2,3] one would expect some nonzero entanglement between apparatus and measured system, even though the amount of such entanglement is extremely small. Because the apparatus has an enormous number of degrees of freedom relative to the measured system, even a very tiny difference between the apparatus states that are correlated with the orthogonal states of the measured system can be sufficient to account for the perceived deviation from strict conservation of the quantity in question. Hence measurements need not violate conservation laws.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2108.08342

Related papers

Entanglement, Conservation Laws, and Wave Function Collapse

Edward J. Gillis

Because quantum measurements have probabilistic outcomes they can seem to violate conservation laws in individual experiments. Despite these appearances, strict conservation of momentum, orbital angular momentum, and energy can be shown to be consistent with the assumption that the entangling interactions that constitute measurements induce a real collapse of the wave function. The essential idea is that measured systems always have some pre-existing entanglement relations with (usually larger) systems, and that apparent changes in conserved quantities in the measured system are correlated with compensating changes in these larger systems. Since wave function collapse is mediated by entanglement relations a full accounting of the relevant quantities requires a computation over all interacting, entangled systems. The demonstrations by Gemmer and Mahler[1], and by Durt[2,3], that entanglement is a generic result of interaction are central to the argument. A stochastic collapse equation based on interaction potentials is described and shown to guarantee conservation of the relevant quantities at all stages of evolution.

•Mar 5, 2018•0 citations

Conservation in Every Quantum Measurement Outcome?

E. Okon, D. Sudarsky, M. Wiedemann

In quantum mechanics, conservation laws are usually understood only statistically and only in the context of unitary evolution: during such evolution, if an observable commutes with the Hamiltonian, its expectation value and Born-rule probability distribution remain unchanged. Individual measurement outcomes, however, disrupt even this weak form of statistical conservation. Recently, though, it has been argued that a stronger, non-statistical form of conservation, valid at the level of individual measurement outcomes, can be recovered. The proposal relies on the claim that any superposition of eigenstates of a conserved quantity must ultimately be prepared relative to another physical system, which serves as the relevant reference frame and remains correlated with the system being prepared. On this enlarged description, the change observed in the measured system is claimed to be exactly compensated by an opposite change in the preparer, thereby restoring conservation at the level of individual measurement outcomes. We analyze this proposal and argue that it faces significant conceptual difficulties. We show that the proposed mechanism is not adequately justified and, moreover, does not establish conservation in individual measurement outcomes as claimed.

quant-pharXiv:2610.29804•Oct 22, 2026•0 citations

Interaction-Induced Wave Function Collapse Respects Conservation Laws

Edward J. Gillis

Because quantum measurements have probabilistic outcomes they can seem to violate conservation laws in individual experiments. Despite these appearances, strict conservation of momentum, orbital angular momentum, and energy can be shown to be consistent with the assumption that the entangling interactions that constitute measurements induce a real collapse of the wave function. The essential idea is that measured systems always have some pre-existing entanglement relations with (usually larger) systems, and that apparent changes in conserved quantities in the measured system are correlated with compensating changes in these larger systems. Since wave function collapse is mediated by entanglement relations a full accounting of the relevant quantities requires a computation over all interacting, entangled systems. The demonstrations by Gemmer and Mahler[1], and by Durt[2,3], that entanglement is a generic result of interaction are central to the argument. A stochastic collapse equation based on interaction potentials is described and shown to guarantee conservation of the relevant quantities at all stages of evolution.

arXiv:1803.02687•Mar 5, 2018•2 citations

Modelling of weak quantum measurements consistent with conservation laws

Stanisław Sołtan, Mateusz Fra̧czak, Wolfgang Belzig +1 more

Abstract We discuss quantum mechanical detection models in the weak limit in the context of conservation laws of physical quantities. In particular, we analyze what kind of system–detector interaction can preserve the global conservation or the related symmetry, and how the final measurement on the detector affects the measured observable of the systems and its presumed conservation. It turns out that the order of noncommuting measurements results in observable differences on the level of third-order correlations functions.

The European Physical Journal Special Topics•Jun 1, 2021•0 citations

Critique of protective measurements

N. D. Hari Dass, Tabish Qureshi

The recently proposed idea of ``protective'' measurement of a quantum state is critically examined, and generalized. Earlier criticisms of the idea are discussed, and their relevance to the proposal assessed. Several constraints on measuring apparatus required by ``protective'' measurements are discussed, with emphasis on how they may restrict their experimental feasibility. Though ``protective'' measurements result in an unchanged system state and a shift of the pointer proportional to the expectation value of the measured observable in the system state, the actual reading of the pointer position gives rise to several subtleties. We propose several schemes for reading the pointer position, both when the apparatus is treated as a classical system as well as when its quantum aspects are taken into account, that address these issues. The tiny entanglement which is always present due to deviation from extreme adiabaticity in realistic situations is argued to be the weakest aspect of the proposal. Because of this, one can never perform a protective measurement on a single quantum system with absolute certainty. This clearly precludes an ontological status for the wave function. Several other conceptual issues are also discussed.

arXiv:quant-ph/9805012•Physical Review A•Apr 1, 1999•48 citations

Entanglement preventing measurements on simple quantum systems

Paul Bracken

The nature and role of the measuring apparatus in the process of measurement in quantum mechanics is discussed. In the Schrödinger picture, the measurement generates an entanglement between the eigenstates of the observable and the states of the apparatus, which becomes part of the overall system. It is shown that with respect to some small systems, this entanglement can be prevented, and that it should be possible to carry out such experiments.

Molecular Physics•Aug 10, 2005•0 citations
When a measurement is made on a system that is not in an eigenstate of the measured observable, it is often assumed that some conservation law has been violated. Discussions of the effect of measurements on conserved quantities often overlook the possibility of entanglement between the measured system and the preparation apparatus. The preparation of a system in any particular state necessarily involves interaction between the apparatus and the system. Since entanglement is a generic result of interaction, as shown by Gemmer and Mahler[1], and by Durt[2,3] one would expect some nonzero entanglement between apparatus and measured system, even though the amount of such entanglement is extremely small. Because the apparatus has an enormous number of degrees of freedom relative to the measured system, even a very tiny difference between the apparatus states that are correlated with the orthogonal states of the measured system can be sufficient to account for the perceived deviation from strict conservation of the quantity in question. Hence measurements need not violate conservation laws.
Because quantum measurements have probabilistic outcomes they can seem to violate conservation laws in individual experiments. Despite these appearances, strict conservation of momentum, orbital angular momentum, and energy can be shown to be consistent with the assumption that the entangling interactions that constitute measurements induce a real collapse of the wave function. The essential idea is that measured systems always have some pre-existing entanglement relations with (usually larger) systems, and that apparent changes in conserved quantities in the measured system are correlated with compensating changes in these larger systems. Since wave function collapse is mediated by entanglement relations a full accounting of the relevant quantities requires a computation over all interacting, entangled systems. The demonstrations by Gemmer and Mahler[1], and by Durt[2,3], that entanglement is a generic result of interaction are central to the argument. A stochastic collapse equation based on interaction potentials is described and shown to guarantee conservation of the relevant quantities at all stages of evolution.
In quantum mechanics, conservation laws are usually understood only statistically and only in the context of unitary evolution: during such evolution, if an observable commutes with the Hamiltonian, its expectation value and Born-rule probability distribution remain unchanged. Individual measurement outcomes, however, disrupt even this weak form of statistical conservation. Recently, though, it has been argued that a stronger, non-statistical form of conservation, valid at the level of individual measurement outcomes, can be recovered. The proposal relies on the claim that any superposition of eigenstates of a conserved quantity must ultimately be prepared relative to another physical system, which serves as the relevant reference frame and remains correlated with the system being prepared. On this enlarged description, the change observed in the measured system is claimed to be exactly compensated by an opposite change in the preparer, thereby restoring conservation at the level of individual measurement outcomes. We analyze this proposal and argue that it faces significant conceptual difficulties. We show that the proposed mechanism is not adequately justified and, moreover, does not establish conservation in individual measurement outcomes as claimed.
Because quantum measurements have probabilistic outcomes they can seem to violate conservation laws in individual experiments. Despite these appearances, strict conservation of momentum, orbital angular momentum, and energy can be shown to be consistent with the assumption that the entangling interactions that constitute measurements induce a real collapse of the wave function. The essential idea is that measured systems always have some pre-existing entanglement relations with (usually larger) systems, and that apparent changes in conserved quantities in the measured system are correlated with compensating changes in these larger systems. Since wave function collapse is mediated by entanglement relations a full accounting of the relevant quantities requires a computation over all interacting, entangled systems. The demonstrations by Gemmer and Mahler[1], and by Durt[2,3], that entanglement is a generic result of interaction are central to the argument. A stochastic collapse equation based on interaction potentials is described and shown to guarantee conservation of the relevant quantities at all stages of evolution.
Abstract We discuss quantum mechanical detection models in the weak limit in the context of conservation laws of physical quantities. In particular, we analyze what kind of system–detector interaction can preserve the global conservation or the related symmetry, and how the final measurement on the detector affects the measured observable of the systems and its presumed conservation. It turns out that the order of noncommuting measurements results in observable differences on the level of third-order correlations functions.
The recently proposed idea of ``protective'' measurement of a quantum state is critically examined, and generalized. Earlier criticisms of the idea are discussed, and their relevance to the proposal assessed. Several constraints on measuring apparatus required by ``protective'' measurements are discussed, with emphasis on how they may restrict their experimental feasibility. Though ``protective'' measurements result in an unchanged system state and a shift of the pointer proportional to the expectation value of the measured observable in the system state, the actual reading of the pointer position gives rise to several subtleties. We propose several schemes for reading the pointer position, both when the apparatus is treated as a classical system as well as when its quantum aspects are taken into account, that address these issues. The tiny entanglement which is always present due to deviation from extreme adiabaticity in realistic situations is argued to be the weakest aspect of the proposal. Because of this, one can never perform a protective measurement on a single quantum system with absolute certainty. This clearly precludes an ontological status for the wave function. Several other conceptual issues are also discussed.