arXiv:2308.14718 · Physical review. D/Physical review. D.

Particle-field duality in QFT measurements

Maria Papageorgiou, José de Ramón, Charis Anastopoulos

Published Mar 21, 2024• 7 citations

Abstract

Pointlike systems coupled to quantum fields are often employed as toy models for measurements in quantum field theory. In this paper, we identify the field observables recorded by such models. In the case of detector models that work in the strong coupling regime, we show that the detector's pointer variable is correlated with time-extended smeared field amplitudes, and it is insensitive to the particle content of the field's state. Then, we show that detector models that work in the weak coupling regime can account for particle phenomenology, such as the existence of a particlelike time-of-arrival and resonant behavior. Finally, we develop an improved field-detector interaction model, adapting the formalism of quantum Brownian motion, that is exactly solvable. This model confirms the association of field and particle properties in the strong and weak coupling regimes, respectively. Further, it can also describe the intermediate regime, in which the field-particle characteristics ``merge.'' In contrast to standard perturbation techniques, this model also recovers the relativistic Breit-Wigner resonant behavior in the weak coupling regime. The modulation of particle-field duality by a single tunable parameter is a novel feature that is, in principle, experimentally accessible.

DOI: 10.1103/physrevd.109.065024

Related papers

Τοπικές μετρήσεις στη σχετικιστική κβαντική πληροφορία : εντοπισμός και μετάδοση σήματος

Maria-Eftychia Papageorgiou

In this thesis, we study some foundational aspects of detector models in quantum field theory (QFT) related to signaling and localization, and we analyze certain frictions with relativistic causality. We characterize the spatiotemporal information that can be extracted from the field using various detector models in different regimes and we define a signaling estimator, based on quantum metrology, that can be used to quantify how much signaling can be transmitted reliably through the quantum field. We analyze ‘impossible measurements’ scenarios in which the microcausality condition in QFT is not sufficient for blocking superluminal signaling between multiple detectors coupled to the field. Further, since QFT does not admit a straightforward particle or field ontology, we ask: what do detectors detect? We answer this question by interpreting the detector’s response in different regimes, for single-particle wavepacket states or coherent states of the field. In the weak coupling regime, we demonstrate in detail how detector models can be used to save particle-like phenomenology, related to the phenomenon of resonance and ‘time-of-arrival’. In the strong coupling regime, we demonstrate how a continuous pointer variable can get correlated with smeared field time-averages. Finally, adapting the formalism of the quantum Brownian motion, we develop an improved field-detector interaction model that is exactly solvable and can be used to characterize the weak, strong and intermediate regime. Apart from an improved description of field measurements and resonance, this models clearly demonstrates the modulation of particle-field duality by a single tunable parameter (the coupling strength), which is a novel feature that is in principle experimentally accessible.

Jan 1, 20230 citations

Measurements on relativistic quantum fields: II. Detector models

Charis Anastopoulos, Ntina Savvidou

This is the second paper on a new formalism for relativistic quantum measurements. Here, we construct a fully relativistic model for detectors that takes into account the detector's state of motion, intrinsics dynamics, initial states and couplings to the measured field. The dual classical/quantum description of the detector is implemented by using a master-equation type of approximation for the coarse-grained pointer variables. Then we identify the probabilities that correspond to ideal measurements, i.e., measurements that are largely insensitive to modeling details of the apparatus. The Unruh-Dewitt and Glauber detectors are recovered at the appropriate limits. We employ our results to models of particle detection, photodetection and relativistic spin measurements, and we derive an ideal distribution for relativistic time-of-arrival probabilities.

arXiv:1509.01838Sep 6, 20152 citations

Time of arrival and localization of relativistic particles

Charis Anastopoulos, Ntina Savvidou

Constructing observables that describe the localization of relativistic particles is an important foundational problem in relativistic quantum field theory (QFT). The description of localization in terms of single-time observables leads to conflict with the requirement of causality. In this paper, we describe particle localization in terms of time-of-arrival observables, defined in terms of the interaction between a quantum field and a measuring apparatus. The resulting probabilities are linear functionals of QFT correlation functions. Specializing to the case of a scalar field, we identify several time-of-arrival observables differing on the way that the apparatus localizes particle-detection records. Maximum localization is obtained for a unique observable that is related to the Newton-Wigner position operator. Finally, we define a measure of localizability for relativistic particles in terms of a novel time-energy uncertainty relation for the variance of the time of arrival.

arXiv:1807.06533Journal of Mathematical PhysicsMar 1, 201927 citations

Broken covariance of particle detector models in relativistic quantum information

Eduardo Martín-Martínez, Tales Rick Perche, Bruno de S. L. Torres

We show that the predictions of commonly used spatially smeared particle detectors coupled to quantum fields are not generally covariant outside the pointlike limit. This lack of covariance manifests itself as an ambiguity in the time-ordering operation. We analyze how the breakdown of covariance affects typical detector models in quantum field theory such as the Unruh--DeWitt model. Specifically, we show how the violations of covariance depend on the state of the detectors-field system, the shape and state of motion of the detectors, and the spacetime geometry. Furthermore, we provide the tools to explicitly evaluate the magnitude of the violation and identify the regimes where the predictions of smeared detectors are either exactly or approximately covariant in perturbative analyses, thus providing limits of validity of smeared particle detector models.

arXiv:2006.12514Physical review. D/Physical review. D.Jan 12, 202164 citations

The Observer Effect and Wave–Particle Duality in the S-field Framework

Petkov, Dimitar

The Observer Effect and Wave–Particle Duality in the S-field Framework --- 1. The traditional wave–particle problem In standard quantum mechanics, physical entities appear to behave: • as waves in interference experiments; • as particles when measured or detected. This has led to the idea that observation itself changes reality, often formulated as: “measurement collapses the wavefunction”. However, this formulation leaves unresolved questions: • What qualifies as an observer? • Why should information acquisition alter physical law? • Where exactly does the transition occur? --- 2. S-field perspective: no wave, no particle as primitives In the S-field framework, neither “wave” nor “particle” is fundamental. At the base level, there exist only: • oscillatory S-field states; • phase, frequency, and orientation; • dynamic resonance patterns. Wave and particle are emergent regimes, not ontological categories. 3. Wave behavior: coherent phase evolution A system exhibits wave-like behavior when: • S-oscillations evolve coherently; • multiple phase paths remain phase-correlated; • no dominant resonance locking occurs. In this regime: • interference patterns arise naturally; • delocalization reflects phase superposition; • the system evolves as a distributed resonance structure. “Wave” behavior is therefore a manifestation of extended phase coherence. --- 4. Particle behavior: resonance locking Particle-like behavior emerges when: • the S-oscillatory ensemble undergoes strong phase locking; • coherence collapses into a dominant resonant configuration; • the system enters a stable 4D projection. Localization is not imposed externally — it is a self-organized resonance outcome. A “particle” is a stable, self-locked oscillatory ensemble. 5. What observation actually does Observation does not create reality and does not collapse a wavefunction. Instead, observation means: • physical interaction with an environment; • introduction of new S-field couplings; • modification of phase relations. This interaction typically: • reduces global phase coherence; • enforces resonance selection; • stabilizes a particular outcome. Thus, observation is not epistemic — it is dynamical. --- 6. Why which-path information destroys interference Interference disappears because: • phase correlations are disrupted; • alternative phase paths decohere; • the system is forced into locally stable resonance modes. Which-path information is not special — any interaction that breaks coherence removes interference. No observer consciousness is required. 7. Delayed-choice experiments In delayed-choice scenarios: • the system remains in a coherent oscillatory regime; • no definitive resonance locking occurs until interaction; • temporal ordering appears paradoxical only classically. In the S-field framework: • time itself emerges from phase ordering; • coherence preservation allows late-mode selection; • no retrocausality is involved. The outcome reflects final coherence conditions, not past knowledge. --- 8. No collapse, only regime transition There is no physical “collapse”. Instead, there is: • a transition from distributed coherence to localized resonance stability; • a change of dynamical regime; • emergence of macroscopic definiteness. Wave → particle transition is micro → macro coherence restructuring. 9. One-sentence synthesis > Wave–particle duality is not a duality of objects, but a duality of coherence regimes in the S-field. --- 10. Conceptual closure This interpretation: • removes observer-dependence; • preserves realism; • unifies wave and particle behavior dynamically; • aligns quantum phenomena with micro–macro transition theory. Si(t) = Ai · e^( i( ωi·t + φi ) ) C = | (1 / N) · Σ_{i=1}^N e^( i φi ) | Order parameter (complex): R·e^( iΨ ) = (1 / N) · Σ_{j=1}^N e^( i φ_j ) , C ≡ R Kuramoto-type phase dynamics (micro ensemble): dφ_i/dt = ω_i + (K / N) · Σ_{j=1}^N sin( φ_j − φ_i ) Self-consistent equation for stationary coherence R: R = ∫ dω g(ω) · √(1 − (ω/(K R))^2 ) (for |ω| ≤ K R) — standard Kuramoto integral form Mass as emergent resonant integral: m ∝ ∫ ρ_S(χ) · C(χ) · dV_S(χ) Micro→macro criterion: C ≥ C_crit ⇒ stable 4D projection (particle regime) C < C_crit ⇒ incoherent / wave-like regime Interference visibility and intensity (two-path): I(Δφ) = I_0 · [ 1 + V · cos( Δφ ) ] , V ∝ C Coherence decay under environment coupling (phenomenological): dC/dt = α(K,…) · C − Γ_env · C ⇒ C(t) = C(0) · e^{ (α − Γ_env) t } Decoherence rate (Fermi-golden-rule style): Γ_env(ω) = (2π / ħ) · |V_int(ω)|^2 · ρ_env(ω) Measurement interaction as coupling-induced locking (mean-field): dr/dt = (K/2) · r · (1 − r^2) − γ · r , fixed points r = 0 (wave) and r = r_* > 0 (particle) when K > K_c Which-path disruption condition: any interaction s.t. Γ_env ≳ α(K,…) ⇒ V → 0 (interference destroyed) Time as accumulated phase change (collective): t ≡ (1 / Ω) · Σ_k Δφ_k , Ω ≡ ⟨ω⟩_ensemble Spatial separation as phase-metric: d_{AB} ∝ | ⟨ e^( i( φ_A − φ_B ) ) ⟩ | Classical limit (macroscopic): lim_{N→∞} Var(φ) → 0 ⇒ C → 1 ⇒ particle-like, deterministic dynamics Compact formal statement: Classicality = lim_{C,N → large} ( Quantum S-ensemble )

Dec 4, 20250 citations

Non-perturbative measurements of two-point functions in quantum field theory

Sebastian Holmén, T. Rick Perche

We present a non-perturbative method through which local probes can access the two-point function of a quantum field within a region of spacetime. By considering a lattice of gapless particle detectors, we identified the probe observables that encode the field's two-point function. We quantify the discrepancies introduced by physical finite-sized interaction regions by performing a spacetime multipole expansion of the smeared two-point function. Our protocol expresses the two-point function entirely in terms of measurable detectors correlations, providing an operational notion of states in QFT.

quant-pharXiv:2605.18945May 20, 20260 citations