Abstract The problem of approximate joint measurement of complementary observables, like position and momentum, and the relevance of the uncertainty relations to that question were at the heart of the investigations of Paul Busch into the foundations of quantum mechanics. A good third of his published work dealt with this and closely related questions. This paper is an attempt to survey some of the steps taken in that research starting with Paul’s first papers on the subject matter in the early 1980’s and reaching its height in recent years.
Abstract The problem of approximate joint measurement of complementary observables, like position and momentum, and the relevance of the uncertainty relations to that question were at the heart of the investigations of Paul Busch into the foundations of quantum mechanics. A good third of his published work dealt with this and closely related questions. This paper is an attempt to survey some of the steps taken in that research starting with Paul’s first papers on the subject matter in the early 1980’s and reaching its height in recent years.
We review the notion of complementarity of observables in quantum mechanics, as formulated and studied by Paul Busch and his colleagues over the years. In addition, we provide further clarification on the operational meaning of the concept, and present several characterisations of complementarity—some of which new—in a unified manner, as a consequence of a basic factorisation lemma for quantum effects. We work out several applications, including the canonical cases of position–momentum, position–energy, number–phase, as well as periodic observables relevant to spatial interferometry. We close the paper with some considerations of complementarity in a noisy setting, focusing especially on the case of convolutions of position and momentum, which was a recurring topic in Paul’s work on operational formulation of quantum measurements and central to his philosophy of unsharp reality.
Uncertainty relations and complementarity of canonically conjugate position and momentum observables in quantum theory are discussed with respect to some general coupling properties of a function and its Fourier transform. The question of joint localization of a particle on bounded position and momentum value sets and the relevance of this question to the interpretation of position-momentum uncertainty relations is surveyed. In particular, it is argued that the Heisenberg interpretation of the uncertainty relations can consistently be carried through in a natural extension of the usual Hilbert space frame of the quantum theory.
In recent years, novel quantifications of measurement error in quantum mechanics have for the first time enabled precise formulations of Heisenberg's famous but often challenged measurement uncertainty relation. These relations take the form of a trade-off for the necessary errors in joint approximate measurements of position and momentum and other incompatible pairs of observables. Here we review some of these error measures, examine their properties and suitability, and compare their relative strengths as criteria for "good" approximations.
Uncertainty relations are commonly praised as one of the central pillars of quantum theory. Usually, they are taught in the first weeks of a beginners lecture, and introduced in the ?rst chapters of a textbook. However, their precise operational meaning and a formulation in a general context, i.e. beyond the example of position and momentum observables, are often left out. The reasoning for this is twofold: On one hand, an exact operational definition of uncertainty, indeterminacy and a corresponding uncertainty principle has been the content of many debates since the early days of quantum mechanics until today. From a modern perspective, we have the consent that there are at least the two notions of preparation and measurement uncertainty: the first notion prohibits the existence of dissipation free states and the latter one the existence of error free joint measurements. On the other hand, we have that, the mathematical tools, which are needed for comprehensive treatment of uncertainty relations in a general context, are still under development and usually go far beyond the mathematical level of an introductory course. In this thesis we will investigate these two notions of uncertainty, their corre- sponding uncertainty relations, such as their interplay. The aim of this thesis is to give answers to the central questions: (1.) Which quantities should be used to formulate uncertainty? (2.) How can we compute uncertainty relations for those? (3.) Are there connections between the two notions of uncertainty? We will do this, whenever possible, in a most general context and with a focus on relevant examples, otherwise. Therefore, we will consider constructions of mea- surement errors and deviation measures that quantify uncertainty, based on, so called, cost functions. Commonly used uncertainty measures like variances, en- tropies, and the Hamming distance are examples for these. We will investigate the structure of the corresponding uncertainty relations and provide several methods that enable us to compute them. The third question is addressed by a theorem that shows, for sharp observables, that measurement uncertainty relations can be lower bounded by preparation uncertainty relations, whenever the same cost function is used.
The so-called preparation uncertainty that occurs in the quantum world can be understood well in purely operational terms, and its existence in any given theory, perhaps differently than in quantum mechanics, can be verified by examining only measurement statistics. Namely, one says that uncertainty occurs in some theory when for some pair of observables, there is no preparation that would exhibit deterministic statistics for both of them. However, the right-hand side of the uncertainty relation is not operational anymore if we do not insist that it is just the minimum of the left-hand side for a given theory. For example, in quantum mechanics, it is some function of two observables that must be computed within the quantum formalism. Also, while joint nonmeasurability of observables is an operational notion, the complementarity in Bohr's sense (i.e., in terms of information needed to describe the system) has not yet been expressed in purely operational terms. Here we propose a general operational framework that provides answers to the above issues. We introduce an operational definition of complementarity and further postulate that complementary observables have to exhibit uncertainty, which means that we propose to put the (operational) complementarity as the right-hand side of the uncertainty relation. In particular, we identify two different notions of uncertainty and complementarity for which the above principle holds in the quantum-mechanical realm. We also introduce postulates for the general measures of uncertainty and complementarity. In order to define quantifiers of complementarity we first turn to the simpler notion of independence that is defined solely in terms of the statistics of two observables. Importantly, for clean and extremal observables---i.e., ones that cannot be simulated irreducibly by other observables---any measure of independence reduces to the proper complementary measure. Finally, as an application of our general framework we define a number of complementarity indicators and show that they can be used to state uncertainty relations. One of them, assuming some natural symmetries, leads to the Tsirelson bound for the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) inequality. Lastly, we show that for a single system a variant of information causality called the information content principle, under the above symmetries, can be interpreted as an uncertainty relation in the above sense.