Model apparatus for quantum measurements

Anu Venugopalan, Deepak Kumar, Rupamanjari Ghosh

By considering the measurement of a quantum spin by two different models of the measuring apparatus, we try to throw some light on the nature of the apparatus that can perform quantum measurement. Our scheme is to consider a quantum spin in interaction with another quantum system playing the role of an apparatus, which in turn is dissipatively coupled to an environment. The coupling with the environment drives the density matrix of the apparatus to a diagonal form. However, measurement is performed only when the reduced density matrix of the apparatus contains correlations with the states of the spin. The two examples considered here show that this happens when the quantum apparatus has a well-defined classical limit. If the apparatus does not have a well-defined classical limit, the reduced density matrix of the apparatus is not correlated with the states of the measured system.

Roy J. Glauber

ARMEN E. ALLAHVERDYAN, Roger Balian, Theo M. Nieuwenhuizen

A model of quantum measurement is proposed, which aims to describe statistical mechanical aspects of this phenomenon, starting from a purely Hamiltonian formulation. The macroscopic measurement apparatus is modeled as an ideal Bose gas, the order parameter of which, that is, the amplitude of the condensate, is the pointer variable. It is shown that properties of irreversibility and ergodicity breaking, which are inherent in the model apparatus, ensure the appearance of definite results of the measurement, and provide a dynamical realization of wave-function reduction or collapse. The measurement process takes place in two steps: First, the reduction of the state of the tested system occurs over a time of order $\ensuremath{\Elzxh}{/(TN}^{1/4}),$ where T is the temperature of the apparatus, and N is the number of its degrees of freedom. This decoherence process is governed by the apparatus-system interaction. During the second step classical correlations are established between the apparatus and the tested system over the much longer time scale of equilibration of the apparatus. The influence of the parameters of the model on nonideality of the measurement is discussed. Schr\"odinger kittens, EPR setups, and information transfer are analyzed.

Stanley Gudder

Art Hobson

Teiko Heinosaari, Mário Ziman

Until now we have treated measurement apparatuses as devices taking quantum systems as their inputs and producing measurement outcomes as outputs. At this level of description, measurement apparatuses are fully described by observables, as discussed in Chapter 3. The measurement outcome distribution is determined by the particular input state and the observable describing the measurement device. In this chapter we explore a mathematical framework suitable for the description of measurement apparatuses for which, in addition to the measurement outcomes, the measured systems are available after the measurement is performed. In such cases we may try to obtain more information on the system by measuring some other observable, or, perhaps by filtering out some preferred output states we may use our measurement apparatus as a preparator. Clearly, in this kind of situation we need a description of measurement apparatuses that is more detailed than that of observables. Therefore, two more refined concepts, measurement models and instruments , will be investigated in this chapter. There is no customary name for a measurement model. As used here, it was first formalized in a general way by Ozawa [106], [107] who referred to the measurement process . A comprehensive general reference on quantum measurements is the monograph by Busch et al. [35], where measurement models are called premeasurements . Some other authors use the term indirect measurements . Three levels of description of measurements It is convenient to think of three levels of description when considering measurements.