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.
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.
The process of measurement plays an important role in quantum theory. Measurements can be direct, if the physical system S interacts directly with the measurement apparatus M (as we have assumed until now), or indirect. In the latter case, the physical system first interacts with an ancillary system B , which may have a space of states that is very different from that of S , for instance much larger; after this interaction has finished, M is used to perform a measurement on B , without any direct interaction with A . Because S is then “protected” from any direct interaction with the measurement apparatus, the state of S is not necessarily strongly modified, and may even be only weakly affected. In both cases, the process implies entanglement between several physical systems. In this chapter, we study how this entanglement is created and used for measurements as well as the notion of weak and continuous measurements. These questions play an important role in several of the interpretations of quantum mechanics that we discuss in Chapter 10. Direct measurements The Von Neumann model of quantum measurement [4] provides a general frame for describing the process in terms of correlations appearing (or disappearing) in the state vector associated with the whole system S + M . In this model, the two systems S and M are initially described by a product state ∣ψ 0 〈 and interact during the time of measurement, so that they become entangled; they then reach a final state ∣ψ′〈 and do not interact anymore.
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.
It is well-known that developments of quantum mechanical states according to the Schrödinger equation during a measurement seem to prevent measurements from having definite results. For, the usually assumed (idealized) Schrödinger development of the measured object and the measuring apparatus during a measurement typically results in a state of the entire system which is a superposition of the eigenstates of the measured observable and measuring observable. And the most common interpretations of quantum mechanics state that an observable does not have a definite value if the quantum mechanical state is a superposition of the eigenstates of the observable. Many ways out of this problem have been suggested. I want to discuss an interpretation suggested by S. Kochen (Kochen 1985), and suggest similar interpretations, each of which accept the universal validity of the Schrödinger equation, and yet yield definite results for measurements.
The central problem in the quantum theory of measurement, how to describe the process of state reduction in terms of the quantum mechanical formalism, is solved on the basis of the relativity of quantal states, which implies that once the apparatus is detected in a well-defined state, the object state must reduce to a corresponding one. This is a process termed by Schrodinger disentanglement. Here, it is essential to observe that Renninger's negative result does constitute an actual measurement process. From this point of view, Heisenberg's interpretation of his microscope experiment and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen arguments are reinvestigated. Satisfactory discussions are given to various experimental situations, such as the Stern-Gerlach-type experiment, successive measurements, macroscopic measurements, and Schrodinger's cat. Finally it is proposed to regard a state vector in quantum mechanics as an irreducible physical construct, in Margenau's sense, that is not further analyzable both mathematically and conceptually.
We present a new interpretation of the terms superposition, entanglement, and measurement that appear in quantum mechanics. We hypothesize that the structure of the wave function for a quantum system at the sub-Planck scale has a deterministic cyclic structure. Each cycle comprises a sequential succession of the eigenstates that comprise a given wave function. Between unitary operations or measurements on the wave function, the sequential arrangement of the current eigenstates chosen by the system is immaterial, but once chosen it remains fixed until another unitary operation or measurement changes the wave function. The probabilistic aspect of quantum mechanics is interpreted by hypothesizing a measurement mechanism which acts instantaneously but the instant of measurement is chosen randomly by the classical measuring apparatus over a small but finite interval from the time the measurement apparatus is activated. At the instant the measurement is made, the wave function irrevocably collapses to a new state (erasing some of the past quantum information) and continues from thereon in that state till changed by a unitary operation or a new measurement.
In this paper, we discuss the importance of measurement in quantum mechanics and the so-called measurement problem. Any quantum system can be described as a linear combination of eigenstates of an operator representing a physical quantity; this means that the system can be in a superposition of states that corresponds to different eigenvalues, i.e., different physical outcomes, each one incompatible with the others. The measurement process converts a state of superposition (not macroscopically defined) in a well-defined state. We show that, if we describe the measurement by the standard laws of quantum mechanics, the system would preserve its state of superposition even on a macroscopic scale. Since this is not the case, we assume that a measurement does not obey to standard quantum mechanics, but to a new set of laws that form a “quantum measurement theory”.