© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

Terms Privacy Legal Notice

arXiv:hep-ph/0304187 · Physics Letters B

What is coherent in neutrino oscillations

Harry J. Lipkin

Published Dec 6, 2003• 30 citations

Abstract

Simple rigorous quantum mechanics with no hand waving nor loopholes clarifies the confusion between three contradictory descriptions of the coherence between different neutrino mass eigenstates that can give rise to oscillations: (1) The standard textbook description of oscillations in time produced by coherence between states with different masses and different energies. (2) Stodolsky's proof that interference between states having different energies cannot be observed in realistic experiments. (3) The description of a pion decay at rest into an observed muon and unobserved neutrino as a “missing mass” experiment where coherence between different neutrino mass eigenstates is not observable. The known position in space of all realistic detectors is rigorously shown to provide the quantum-mechanical ignorance of the neutrino momentum needed to produce coherence between amplitudes from neutrino states with the same energy and different masses. Conditions are precisely formulated for the loss of coherence when mass eigenstate wave packets moving with different velocities separate. The example of Bragg scattering shows how quantum-mechanically imposed ignorance produces coherence.

DOI: 10.1016/j.physletb.2003.11.013

Related papers

WHAT IS COHERENT IN NEUTRINO OSCILLATIONS THE ANALOG WITH A TWO-SLIT EXPERIMENT

Harry J. Lipkin

The standard treatment of neutrino oscillations recalls the story of the mathematics lecturer who said "It is obvious that ...." then stopped and said; "Is it obvious?",went out for a half hour, and returned to say; "Yes it is obvious".The text book neutrino-oscillation wave function, a coherent linear combination of states with different energies, is not found in any real experiments.Its application to reality is obvious.But the interval between "Is it obvious?" and "Yes it is obvious" is filled with many wrong arguments, many wrong papers, and more papers showing that the wrong arguments are wrong.We clari& this issue by describing the passage of a neutrino from source to detector as a multipath experiment where knowing the path destroys coherence, considering the beam and the detector as a correlated quantum system and applying this approach to Bragg scattering by X-rays as well as neutrinos.Amplitudes with the same energy and different masses are detected coherently and produce oscillations.Amplitudes with different energies are incoherent.Quantum mechanics alone shows the existence of a neutrino mass difference to be required to explain the observed Super-Kamiokande data.

•May 1, 2001•0 citations

Neutrino oscillations as a "which-path" experiment

Harry J. Lipkin

The role of simple quantum mechanics in understanding neutrino oscillation experiments is pointed out by comparison with two-slit and Bragg scattering experiments. The importance of considering the beam and the detector as a correlated quantum system is emphasized. Quantum mechanics alone shows that the difference observed in the same neutrino detector at Super-Kamiokande between upward and downward going neutrinos requires the existence of a neutrino mass difference. The localization of the source and detector in space in the laboratory system for long times leads to an uncertainty in the momentum but not of the energy of the neutrino and to coherence between states having different momenta and the same energy and not between states with different energies.

arXiv:hep-ph/9907551•Jul 29, 1999•0 citations

Quantum coherence between mass eigenstates of a neutrino cannot be destroyed by its mass-momentum entanglement

James M. Cline

In the latest of a series of papers (arXiv:2410.21850), it has been claimed that neutrinos cannot oscillate as a consequence of their mass mixing. I clarify that this arises from the unrealistic assumption that neutrinos will always be in nearly exact eigenstates of energy, and ignoring the spatial dependence of the neutrino wave function. Taking into account the latter, neutrinos will be observed to oscillate in precisely the expected manner.

arXiv:2411.01190•Nov 2, 2024•0 citations

Neutrino oscillation measurements computed in quantum field theory

Andrew Kobach, Aneesh V. Manohar, John McGreevy

We perform such a calculation in quantum field theory, where we include simultaneously the source, detector, and neutrino fields in the Hamiltonian. Within the appropriate limits associated with current neutrino oscillation experiments, we recover the standard oscillation formula. On the other hand, we find that the dominant contributions to the amplitude are associated with different neutrino mass eigenstates being emitted at different times, such that they arrive at the detector at the same time. This is contrary to the neutrino wave packet picture, where they are emitted simultaneously and separate as they travel to the detector. This has direct consequences regarding the mechanisms that lead to a damping of neutrino oscillations for very long baselines. Our analysis also provides a pedagogical example of a measurement process in quantum mechanics.

arXiv:1711.07491•Physics Letters B•Jun 21, 2018•21 citations

Testing the wave packet approach to neutrino oscillations in future experiments

Boris J. Kayser, Joachim Kopp

When neutrinos propagate over long distances, the mass eigenstate components of a flavor eigenstate will become spatially separated due to their different group velocities. This can happen over terrestrial distance scales if the neutrino energy is of order MeV and if the neutrino is localized (in a quantum mechanical sense) to subatomic scales. For example, if the Heisenberg uncertainty in the neutrino position is below 0.01 Angstrom, neutrino decoherence can be observed in reactor neutrinos using a large liquid scintillator detector.

arXiv:1005.4081•May 21, 2010•11 citations

Approximate neutrino oscillations in the vacuum

Emilio Ciuffoli, Jarah Evslin, Hosam Mohammed

Abstract It is well known that neutrino oscillations may damp due to decoherence caused by the separation of mass eigenstate wave packets or by a baseline uncertainty of order the oscillation wave length. In this note we show that if the particles created together with the neutrino are not measured and do not interact with the environment, then the first source of decoherence is not present. This demonstration uses the saddle point approximation and also assumes that the experiment lasts longer than a certain threshold. We independently derive this result using the external wave packet model and also using a model in which the fields responsible for neutrino production and detection are treated dynamically. Intuitively this result is a consequence of the fact that the neutrino emission time does not affect the final state and so amplitudes corresponding to distinct emission times must be added coherently. This fact also implies that oscillations resulting from mass eigenstates which are detected simultaneously arise from neutrinos which were not created simultaneously but are nonetheless coherent, realizing the neutrino oscillation paradigm of Kobach, Manohar and McGreevy.

arXiv:2001.03287•The European Physical Journal C•Apr 1, 2021•8 citations

Simple rigorous quantum mechanics with no hand waving nor loopholes clarifies the confusion between three contradictory descriptions of the coherence between different neutrino mass eigenstates that can give rise to oscillations: (1) The standard textbook description of oscillations in time produced by coherence between states with different masses and different energies. (2) Stodolsky's proof that interference between states having different energies cannot be observed in realistic experiments. (3) The description of a pion decay at rest into an observed muon and unobserved neutrino as a “missing mass” experiment where coherence between different neutrino mass eigenstates is not observable. The known position in space of all realistic detectors is rigorously shown to provide the quantum-mechanical ignorance of the neutrino momentum needed to produce coherence between amplitudes from neutrino states with the same energy and different masses. Conditions are precisely formulated for the loss of coherence when mass eigenstate wave packets moving with different velocities separate. The example of Bragg scattering shows how quantum-mechanically imposed ignorance produces coherence.

The standard treatment of neutrino oscillations recalls the story of the mathematics lecturer who said "It is obvious that ...." then stopped and said; "Is it obvious?",went out for a half hour, and returned to say; "Yes it is obvious".The text book neutrino-oscillation wave function, a coherent linear combination of states with different energies, is not found in any real experiments.Its application to reality is obvious.But the interval between "Is it obvious?" and "Yes it is obvious" is filled with many wrong arguments, many wrong papers, and more papers showing that the wrong arguments are wrong.We clari& this issue by describing the passage of a neutrino from source to detector as a multipath experiment where knowing the path destroys coherence, considering the beam and the detector as a correlated quantum system and applying this approach to Bragg scattering by X-rays as well as neutrinos.Amplitudes with the same energy and different masses are detected coherently and produce oscillations.Amplitudes with different energies are incoherent.Quantum mechanics alone shows the existence of a neutrino mass difference to be required to explain the observed Super-Kamiokande data.

The role of simple quantum mechanics in understanding neutrino oscillation experiments is pointed out by comparison with two-slit and Bragg scattering experiments. The importance of considering the beam and the detector as a correlated quantum system is emphasized. Quantum mechanics alone shows that the difference observed in the same neutrino detector at Super-Kamiokande between upward and downward going neutrinos requires the existence of a neutrino mass difference. The localization of the source and detector in space in the laboratory system for long times leads to an uncertainty in the momentum but not of the energy of the neutrino and to coherence between states having different momenta and the same energy and not between states with different energies.

We perform such a calculation in quantum field theory, where we include simultaneously the source, detector, and neutrino fields in the Hamiltonian. Within the appropriate limits associated with current neutrino oscillation experiments, we recover the standard oscillation formula. On the other hand, we find that the dominant contributions to the amplitude are associated with different neutrino mass eigenstates being emitted at different times, such that they arrive at the detector at the same time. This is contrary to the neutrino wave packet picture, where they are emitted simultaneously and separate as they travel to the detector. This has direct consequences regarding the mechanisms that lead to a damping of neutrino oscillations for very long baselines. Our analysis also provides a pedagogical example of a measurement process in quantum mechanics.

When neutrinos propagate over long distances, the mass eigenstate components of a flavor eigenstate will become spatially separated due to their different group velocities. This can happen over terrestrial distance scales if the neutrino energy is of order MeV and if the neutrino is localized (in a quantum mechanical sense) to subatomic scales. For example, if the Heisenberg uncertainty in the neutrino position is below 0.01 Angstrom, neutrino decoherence can be observed in reactor neutrinos using a large liquid scintillator detector.

Abstract It is well known that neutrino oscillations may damp due to decoherence caused by the separation of mass eigenstate wave packets or by a baseline uncertainty of order the oscillation wave length. In this note we show that if the particles created together with the neutrino are not measured and do not interact with the environment, then the first source of decoherence is not present. This demonstration uses the saddle point approximation and also assumes that the experiment lasts longer than a certain threshold. We independently derive this result using the external wave packet model and also using a model in which the fields responsible for neutrino production and detection are treated dynamically. Intuitively this result is a consequence of the fact that the neutrino emission time does not affect the final state and so amplitudes corresponding to distinct emission times must be added coherently. This fact also implies that oscillations resulting from mass eigenstates which are detected simultaneously arise from neutrinos which were not created simultaneously but are nonetheless coherent, realizing the neutrino oscillation paradigm of Kobach, Manohar and McGreevy.