In the context of (far-field) multislit interferometry we investigate the utility of two formulations of uncertainty in accounting for the complementarity of spatial localization and fringe width. We begin with a characterization of the relevant observables and general considerations regarding the suitability of different types of measures. The detailed analysis shows that both of the discussed uncertainty formulations yield qualitatively similar results, confirming that they correctly capture the relevant tradeoff. One approach, based on an idea of Aharonov and co-workers, is intuitively appealing and relies on a modification of the Heisenberg uncertainty relation. The other approach, developed by Uffink and Hilgevoord for single- and double-slit experiments, is readily applied to multislits. However, it is found that one of the underlying concepts requires generalization and that the choice of the parameters requires more consideration than was known.
In the context of (far-field) multislit interferometry we investigate the utility of two formulations of uncertainty in accounting for the complementarity of spatial localization and fringe width. We begin with a characterization of the relevant observables and general considerations regarding the suitability of different types of measures. The detailed analysis shows that both of the discussed uncertainty formulations yield qualitatively similar results, confirming that they correctly capture the relevant tradeoff. One approach, based on an idea of Aharonov and co-workers, is intuitively appealing and relies on a modification of the Heisenberg uncertainty relation. The other approach, developed by Uffink and Hilgevoord for single- and double-slit experiments, is readily applied to multislits. However, it is found that one of the underlying concepts requires generalization and that the choice of the parameters requires more consideration than was known.
A pair of uncertainty relations relevant for quantum states of multislit interferometry is derived, based on the mutually commuting ``modular'' position and momentum operators and their complementary counterparts, originally introduced by Aharonov and co-workers. We provide a precise argument as to why these relations are superior to the standard Heisenberg uncertainty relation at expressing the complementarity between spatial localization and the appearance of fringes. We further support the argument with explicit computations involving wave functions specifically tailored to the interference setup. Conceptually developing the idea of Aharonov and co-workers, we show how the modular momentum should reflect the given experimental setup, yielding a refined observable that accurately captures the fine structure of the interference pattern.
The present investigation is about the quantum mechanics of multislit interference experiments. One of the cornerstones of our understanding of quantum mechanics is provided by the analysis of this type of experiments. Beginning with Bohr and Einstein, the discussion revolved mostly around single-slit diffraction and double-slit interference, probing the complementarity of path determination and the appearance of interference fringes, and contrasting the familiar with the quantum. Here, we are concerned with developing a systematic understanding and description of multislit interference experiments, i.e. setups in which a plurality of slits is illuminated. We provide a characterisation of a number of relevant observables, discussing those that are compatible and may be measured jointly, and also incompatible observables which cannot be measured jointly but instead display quantum uncertainty. \nWe begin with a discussion of a particular modification of the classic double- slit interference experiment which highlights the realisation of specific position and momentum observables which are jointly measurable. Although there are technical results regarding the coexistence of specific position and momentum observables, it may be surprising that ubiquitous experimental setups provide a preparation of such quantum states. We proceed with a discussion of the particular character of the incompatibility of certain measurements by building on an initial heuristic argument provided by Aharonov, Pendleton and Petersen. We prove, extend and discuss a formulation of un- certainty suitable for the context of multislit experiments. We conclude with a comparison of this formulation of uncertainty with an alternative uncertainty formulation developed by Uffink and Hilgevoord. Although these two uncertainty formulations are very different technically, we demonstrate that the same tradeoff is expressed independently.
In standard formulations of the uncertainty principle, two fundamental features are typically cast as impossibility statements: two noncommuting observables cannot in general both be sharply defined (for the same state), nor can they be measured jointly. The pioneers of quantum mechanics were acutely aware and puzzled by this fact, and it motivated Heisenberg to seek a mitigation, which he formulated in his seminal paper of 1927. He provided intuitive arguments to show that the values of, say, the position and momentum of a particle can at least be unsharply defined, and they can be measured together provided some approximation errors are allowed. Only now, nine decades later, a working theory of approximate joint measurements is taking shape, leading to rigorous and experimentally testable formulations of associated error tradeoff relations. Here we briefly review this new development, explaining the concepts and steps taken in the construction of optimal joint approximations of pairs of incompatible observables. As a case study, we deduce measurement uncertainty relations for qubit observables using two distinct error measures. We provide an operational interpretation of the error bounds and discuss some of the first experimental tests of such relations.
In standard formulations of the uncertainty principle, two fundamental features are typically cast as impossibility statements: two noncommuting observables cannot in general both be sharply defined (for the same state), nor can they be measured jointly. The pioneers of quantum mechanics were acutely aware and puzzled by this fact, and it motivated Heisenberg to seek a mitigation, which he formulated in his seminal paper of 1927. He provided intuitive arguments to show that the values of, say, the position and momentum of a particle can at least be unsharply defined, and they can be measured together provided some approximation errors are allowed. Only now, nine decades later, a working theory of approximate joint measurements is taking shape, leading to rigorous and experimentally testable formulations of associated error tradeoff relations. Here we briefly review this new development, explaining the concepts and steps taken in the construction of optimal joint approximations of pairs of incompatible observables. As a case study, we deduce measurement uncertainty relations for qubit observables using two distinct error measures. We provide an operational interpretation of the error bounds and discuss some of the first experimental tests of such relations.
Abstract In standard formulations of the uncertainty principle, two fundamental features are typically cast as impossibility statements: two noncommuting observables cannot in general both be sharply defined (for the same state), nor can they be measured jointly. The pioneers of quantum mechanics were acutely aware and puzzled by this fact, and it motivated Heisenberg to seek a mitigation, which he formulated in his seminal paper of 1927. He provided intuitive arguments to show that the values of, say, the position and momentum of a particle can at least be unsharply defined, and they can be measured together provided some approximation errors are allowed. Only now, nine decades later, a working theory of approximate joint measurements is taking shape, leading to rigorous and experimentally testable formulations of associated error tradeoff relations. Here we briefly review this new development, explaining the concepts and steps taken in the construction of optimal joint approximations of pairs of incompatible observables. As a case study, we deduce measurement uncertainty relations for qubit observables using two distinct error measures. We provide an operational interpretation of the error bounds and discuss some of the first experimental tests of such relations.
We revisit the connection between the complementarity and uncertainty principles of quantum mechanics within the framework of Mach–Zehnder interferometry. We focus our attention on the trade-off relation between complementary path information and fringe visibility. This relation is equivalent to the uncertainty relation of Schrödinger and Robertson for a suitably chosen pair of observables. We show that it is equivalent as well to the uncertainty inequality provided by Landau and Pollak. We also study the relationship of this trade-off relation with a family of entropic uncertainty relations based on Rényi entropies. There is no equivalence in this case, but the different values of the entropic parameter do define regimes that provides us with a tool to discriminate between non-trivial states of minimum uncertainty. The existence of such regimes agrees with previous results of Luis (2011 Phys. Rev. A 84 034101), although their meaning was not sufficiently clear. We discuss the origin of these regimes with the intention of gaining a deeper understanding of entropic measures.