Quantum systems range from the traditional microscopic ones like electron and atoms to macroscopic ones like superconductors. There are also quantum fields. This chapter sets out one general properties of these systems. For a classical particle, such a sequence does converge to give a value for the instantaneous velocity with arbitrary accuracy. For a quantum particle, the situation is entirely different. It is accepted that a quantum system, say an electron, has an objective existence. At the outset we assume that a measurement operation exists to produce a value of any given observable of the system. This assumption is built into the concept of observables which are physical quantities which can be measured to produce a value. Since a quantum particle in a general state may not have an objective value of a given observable independent of measurement it is useful to distinguish two kinds of values: possessed values and measured values.
Quantum systems range from the traditional microscopic ones like electron and atoms to macroscopic ones like superconductors. There are also quantum fields. This chapter sets out one general properties of these systems. For a classical particle, such a sequence does converge to give a value for the instantaneous velocity with arbitrary accuracy. For a quantum particle, the situation is entirely different. It is accepted that a quantum system, say an electron, has an objective existence. At the outset we assume that a measurement operation exists to produce a value of any given observable of the system. This assumption is built into the concept of observables which are physical quantities which can be measured to produce a value. Since a quantum particle in a general state may not have an objective value of a given observable independent of measurement it is useful to distinguish two kinds of values: possessed values and measured values.
The quantities in physics that can be measured are conventionally denoted observables : entities that can be observed (directly or indirectly) and to which a value in appropriate units can be assigned. Examples include position, momentum, and energy. Unlike in classical physics, the concept of an observable in quantum theory possesses a significance beyond that of the measurable: to each observable there corresponds a unique operator in an abstract, linear vector space. These operators (and others) govern all aspects of quantum systems. Quantum operators act on abstract vectors in the linear space. Especially important are the eigenvectors and eigenvalues of these operators, in particular because some of the eigenvectors are the quantum states mentioned in the preceding chapters. Furthermore, for any operator that is the mathematical image of an observable, its eigenvalues constitute the entire set of values that measurement of the observable can yield . Finally, from the quantum states one can obtain the probabilities for the occurrence of events in the microscopic world, for example, the most likely value that measurement of an observable will yield. The concepts of operators and eigenvalue problems, as well as those of quantal probabilities, of Hermiticity, and of complete sets, were encountered and exemplified in the preceding chapter using the language of differential equations. While much of quantum mechanics could be presented in terms of this language alone, certain fundamental concepts (spin, for instance) cannot be, and it eventually becomes necessary to consider quantum mechanics as a theoretical framework embedded in that abstract linear vector space known as a Hilbert space.
Despite its power as the conceptual basis for a huge range of physical phenomena in atomic and subatomic physics, quantum mechanics still suffers from a lack of clarity regarding the physical meaning of its fundamental theoretical concepts, such as those of quantum state and of quantum theoretical quantities or variables , dealt with by the known mathematical-theoretical rules. These concepts have generally been considered as not giving a direct description of physical systems, for they do not correspond to what is usually understood by `physical states' or `physical properties', notably characterized by definite numerical values such as those obtained from measurement. The situation has been tentatively expressed in terms of various `interpretations', conceived not only with regard to the physical meanings of mathematical quantities, but also in connection with philosophical statements about `physical reality'. The question of whether or not quantum theoretical quantities describe definite physical systems existing in nature has therefore generally been considered as beyond the possibilities of physics, because of the definitions that are commonly taken for `physical state' and `physical quantity'. We sketch the main ideas on this problem and propose a possible way out of the puzzle, in terms of an extension of the meaning given to the concepts of the physical state and physical quantity of a system, which would allow one, without any theoretical change in quantum mechanics, to speak consistently of real quantum systems as having definite physical properties .
Microscopic systems exhibit many intriguing quantum mechanical phenomena which cannot be explained by classical physics. Quantum mechanics has succesfully explained the behaviour of subatomic particles, atoms, and electromagnetic waves where entanglement, wave-particle duality and superposition of particles has been observed. In macroscopic scales, quantum mechanics explains the microscopic origin of electronic properties of solids, and quantum coherence effects are routinely observed in superfluids and superconductors. However, most macroscopic objects behave according to the laws of classical physics due to decoherence effects caused by interaction with the environment. Mechanical systems are ideal for studying quantum behavior of macroscopic objects as they can be measured with high accuracy, and their interaction with the environment can be controlled. Cavity optomechanics studies the interaction between light and mechanical objects through radiation pressure force. Recent developments in the field have made it possible to study quantum behaviour in macroscopic mechanical objects. For example, mechanical oscillators coupled to either microwave or optical light have been cooled to their quantum ground state. This thesis studies a cavity optomechanical system in which micromechanical aluminium membrane resonator is coupled to a superconducting microwave circuit resonator. This work focuses on the phenomena relating to the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle which sets a fundamental limit to the precision in which certain pairs of properties of a system can be measured. Due to uncertainty principle, even if a harmonic oscillator is cooled to the ground state, it still has random motion called the zero-point motion. This sets a fundamental limit on how accurately one can measure the motion of the resonator. In a squeezed quantum state, fluctuations of a quantity can be reduced below this quantum limit, at the cost of increased fluctuations in the pair variable. In this work, motion of a nearly macroscopic object is measured in a squeezed state. Due to uncertainty principle, a measurement amplifying an oscillatory signal always adds noise. However, when information in one part of the signal is lost, one can amplify and measure the other part perfectly. This kind of nearly noiseless phase-sensitive measurement, and squeezing of microwave fields is demonstrated in this work. An optomechanical device that simultaneously performs high-gain amplification and frequency conversion is created. Collective dynamics of a multimode optomechanical system is studied. When measuring the oscillator position continuously, the system is perturbed by the measuring. This can be avoided in quantum back-action evading measurement, which is demonstrated for collective motion of two mechanical resonators. Finally, an entanglement of centre-of-mass motion of two nearly macroscopic objects is created and stabilised.
The behavior of classical macroscopic particles – from baseballs to planets – is governed by Newtonian mechanics as we have described in the first chapters of this book. The behavior of very small particles, on the other hand, is governed by an entirely different collection of equations and rules that go under the name of “quantum mechanics” and these particles are referred to as quantum particles. These rules have analogies to classical mechanics, but are fundamentally different and somewhat mysterious as we discussed in Chapter 8. The fundamental principles of quantum mechanics cannot be proven to be correct. They were developed based on the results of experimental observation, by analogy with classical mechanics, and through the consideration of logical implications of the formalisms used. There is no way to derive the fundamental elements of quantum mechanics, any more than one could predict from first principles that Newtonian forces should add as vectors. On the other hand, quantum mechanics is among the most rigorously tested theories in science, and the predictions of quantum mechanics have, so far, always been in agreement with experiment. In this chapter, we will present quantum mechanics as a series of postulates and examine their implications in application to simple one-dimensional systems. In the next chapter we will examine quantum effects in real systems including atoms, molecules, crystals, and artificially engineered nano-structures. Postulates of quantum mechanics QM Postulate 1: A quantum particle is described by a wave function Ψ( x , y , z , t ) which is a function of spatial coordinates and time. All physically determinable quantities can be derived from the wave function Ψ( x , y , z , t ) ; quantities which cannot be found from the wave function are not physically meaningful. Note that some things that one could ask about a quantum particle, for example the exact position and simultaneous exact momentum of a particle, are not derivable from the wave function and are therefore considered indeterminate (or uncertain ). These are things which cannot ever be known about a particle, and, as such, they are meaningless to contemplate.
We have seen in the previous chapter how useful wave mechanics can be in solving physical problems. But wave mechanics has several limitations. It describes physical states by means of wave functions, which are functions of the positions of the particles of the system, but why should we single out position as the fundamental physical observable? For instance, we might want to describe states in terms of probability amplitudes for particles to have certain values of the momentum or energy rather than the position. A more fundamental limitation: There are attributes of physical systems that cannot be described at all in terms of the positions and momenta of a set of particles. One of these attributes is spin , which will be the subject of Chapter 4. Another is the value of the electric or magnetic field at some point in space, treated in Chapter 11. This chapter will describe the principles of quantum mechanics in a formalism which is essentially the “transformation theory” of Dirac, mentioned briefly in Section 1.4. This formalism generalizes both the wave mechanics of Schrödinger and the matrix mechanics of Heisenberg, and is sufficiently comprehensive to apply to any sort of physical system. States The first postulate of quantum mechanics is that physical states can be represented as vectors in a sort of abstract space known as Hilbert space . Before getting into Hilbert space, I need to say a bit about vectors in general. In kindergarten we learn that vectors are quantities with both magnitude and direction. Later, when we study analytic geometry, we learn instead to describe a vector in d dimensions as a string of d numbers, the components of the vector. This latter approach lends itself well to calculation, but in some respects the kindergarten version is better, because it allows us to describe relations among vectors without specifying a coordinate system. For instance, a statement that one vector is parallel to a second vector, or perpendicular to a third, has nothing to do with how we choose our coordinate system.
In classical physics, the ‘state’ of a particle, at any particular time, is taken to involve a definite position in space and a definite motion; and the state of a system of particles is taken to involve a definite position in space and a definite motion for each of the particles. The situation in relation to quantum mechanics is completely different. As in classical physics, calculations can be made concerning the position and motion of a particle. However, this representation is not by means of symbols for scalar or vector quantities: it is by a more complex mathematical object. This quantum state does not indicate or represent position or motion in any direct way: what it does in substance is to enable calculation of the probability of the particle in question being found to have a position or momentum if an appropriate measurement is made.