Abstract How to compute the probability distribution of a detection time, i.e., of the time which a detector registers as the arrival time of a quantum particle, is a long-debated problem. In this regard, Bohmian mechanics provides in a straightforward way the distribution of the time at which the particle actually does arrive at a given surface in 3-space in the absence of detectors. However, as we discuss here, since the presence of detectors can change the evolution of the wave function and thus the particle trajectories, it cannot be taken for granted that the arrival time of the Bohmian trajectories in the absence of detectors agrees with the one in the presence of detectors, and even less with the detection time. In particular, we explain why certain distributions that Das and Dürr (Sci. Rep. 9: 2242, 2019) presented as the distribution of the detection time in a case with spin, based on assuming that all three times mentioned coincide, are actually not what Bohmian mechanics predicts.
In a recent paper Grot, Rovelli, and Tate (GRT) [Phys. Rev. A 54, 4676 (1996)] derived an expression for the probability distribution $\ensuremath{\pi}(T;X)$ of intrinsic arrival times
T(X) at position
x=X for a quantum particle with initial wave function $\ensuremath{\psi}(x,t=0)$ freely evolving in one dimension. This was done by quantizing the classical expression for the time of arrival of a free particle at
X, assuming a particular choice of operator ordering, and then regulating the resulting time of arrival operator. For the special case of a minimum-uncertainty-product wave packet at
t=0 with average wave number
〈k〉 and variance $\ensuremath{\Delta}k$ they showed that their analytical expression for $\ensuremath{\pi}(T;X)$ agreed with the probability current density
J(x=X,t=T) only to terms of order $\ensuremath{\Delta}k/〈k〉.$ They dismissed the probability current density as a viable candidate for the exact arrival time distribution on the grounds that it can sometimes be negative. This fact is not a problem within Bohmian mechanics where the arrival time distribution for a particle, either free or in the presence of a potential, is rigorously given by
∣J(X,T)∣ (suitably normalized) [W. R. McKinnon and C. R. Leavens, Phys. Rev. A 51, 2748 (1995); C. R. Leavens, Phys. Lett. A 178, 27 (1993); M. Daumer et al., in On Three Levels: The Mathematical Physics of Micro-, Meso-, and Macro-Approaches to Physics, edited by M. Fannes et al. (Plenum, New York, 1994); M. Daumer, in Bohmian Mechanics and Quantum Theory: An Appraisal, edited by J. T. Cushing et al. (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1996)]. The two theories are compared in this paper and a case presented for which the results could not differ more: According to GRT's theory, every particle in the ensemble reaches a point
x=X, where $\ensuremath{\psi}(x,t)$ and
J(x,t) are both zero for all
t, while no particle ever reaches
X according to the theory based on Bohmian mechanics. Some possible implications are discussed.
It is well known that orthodox quantum mechanics does not make unambiguous predictions for the statistics in arrival time (or time-of-flight) experiments. Bohmian mechanics (or de Broglie--Bohm theory) offers a distinct conceptual advantage in this regard, owing to the well-defined concepts of point particles and trajectories embedded in this theory. We revisit a recently proposed experiment [S. Das and D. D\"urr, Sci. Rep. 9, 2242 (2019)], the numerical analysis of which revealed a striking spin dependence in the (Bohmian) time-of-arrival distributions of a spin-1/2 particle. We present here a mathematically tractable variant of the same experiment, where the predicted effects can be established rigorously. We also obtain some results that can be compared with experiment.
The computation of detection probabilities and arrival time distributions within Bohmian mechanics in general needs the explicit knowledge of a relevant sample of trajectories. Here it is shown how for one-dimensional systems and rigid inertial detectors these quantities can be computed without calculating any trajectories. An expression in terms of the wavefunction Ψ and its spatial derivative ∂ x Ψ, both restricted to the boundary of the detector's spacetime volume, is derived for the general case, where the probability current at the detector's boundary may vary its sign.
There are several inequivalent proposals in the literature for how to compute the probability distribution of the time that a detector registers for the arrival of a quantum particle. For three of these proposals, based on two kinds of absorbing boundary conditions and imaginary potentials, we compute the predicted distribution for an experimental setup involving a single non-relativistic quantum particle with spin 0 or 1/2 in a wave guide along the
z axis with the detector waiting downstream. We find that the distribution shows signs of partial reflection of the wave function off of the detector; for a spin-1/2 wave function, it is independent of the initial spin orientation for the parameters tested but does depend, for boundary conditions coupling to the spin, on the width of the wave guide. We also compare our predictions with the competing ones of Das and Dürr [arXiv:1802.07141].
In this work, we analyze recent proposals by Das and Dürr (DD) to measure the arrival time distributions of quantum particles within the framework of de Broglie Bohm theory (or Bohmian mechanics). We also analyze the criticisms made by Goldstein Tumulka and Zanghì (GTZ) of these same proposals, and show that each protagonist is both right and wrong. In detail, we show that DD’s predictions are indeed measurable in principle, but that they will not lead to violations of the no-signalling theorem used in Bell’s theorem, in contradiction with some of Das and Maudlin’s hopes.
Time of arrival refers to the time a particle takes after emission to impinge upon a suitably idealised detector surface. Within quantum theory, no generally accepted solution exists so far for the corresponding probability distribution of arrival times. In this work we derive a general solution for a single body without spin impacting on a so called ideal detector in the absence of any other forces or obstacles. A solution of the so called screen problem for this case is also given. After discussing the shortcomings of the so called ‘absorbing boundary condition’, which is arguably the natural approach within quantum mechanics, we construct the ideal detector model via mathematical probability theory. This detector model assures that the probability flux through the detector surface is always positive, so that the corresponding distributions can be derived via an approach originally suggested by Daumer, Dürr, Goldstein, and Zanghì. The resulting dynamical model is based on an adaption of the Madelung equations and is, strictly speaking, not compatible with quantum mechanics. Still, it is well-described within geometric quantum theory. Geometric quantum theory is a novel adaption of quantum mechanics, which makes the latter consistent with mathematical probability theory. Implications to the general theory of measurement and avenues for future research are also provided. Future mathematical work should focus on finding an appropriate distributional formulation of the evolution equations and studying the well-posedness of the corresponding Cauchy problem.