It is shown that it is possible to measure the Schrödinger wave of a single quantum system. This provides a strong argument for associating physical reality with a quantum state of a single system in sharp contrast with the usual approach in which the physical meaning of a quantum state is related only to an ensemble of identical systems. An apparent paradox between measurability of a quantum state of a single system and the relativistic causality is resolved.
It is shown that it is possible to measure the Schrödinger wave of a single quantum system. This provides a strong argument for associating physical reality with a quantum state of a single system in sharp contrast with the usual approach in which the physical meaning of a quantum state is related only to an ensemble of identical systems. An apparent paradox between measurability of a quantum state of a single system and the relativistic causality is resolved.
We show that it is possible to measure the Schrödinger wave of a single quantum system. This provides a strong argument for associating physical reality with the quantum state of a single system, and challenges the usual assumption that the quantum state has physical meaning only for an ensemble of identical systems. While the Schrödinger wave is a basic element of quantum theory, it is generally believed that one cannot associate physical reality to the wave of a single particle. Rather, the Schrödinger wave is often viewed as a mathematical tool for calculating the probabilities of various outcomes of certain experiments when many such experiments are performed on an ensemble of identical systems, all in the same quantum state. Several arguments seem to support this point of view: i) We have never seen the quantum state of a single particle in a laboratory. Indeed, while a wave is typically spread over a region of space, we never see a particle simultaneously in several distinct locations. ii) If we could see a quantum state, we could presumably distinguish it from any other quantum state, but the unitary time evolution of states in quantum
Protective measurements yield properties of the quantum state of a single quantum system without affecting the quantum state. A protective measurement involves adiabatic coupling to the measuring device together with a procedure to protect the state from changing. For nondegenerate energy eigenstates the protection is provided by the system itself. In this case it is actually possible to measure the Schrödinger wave via measurements on a single system. This fact provides an argument in favor of associating physical reality with a quantum state of a single system, challenging the usual ensemble interpretation. We also believe that the complete description of a quantum system requires a two-state vector formalism involving (in addition to the usual one)a future quantum state evolving backwards in time. Protective measurements testing the two-state vector reality are constructed.
Based on an analysis of protective measurements, we show that the quantum state represents the physical state of a single quantum system. This result is more definite than the PBR theorem [Pusey, Barrett, and Rudolph, Nature Phys. 8, 475 (2012)]. The physical meaning of the quantum state is an important interpreta-tive problem of quantum mechanics. A long-standing question is whether a pure state relates only to an ensemble of identically prepared systems or di-rectly to the state of a single system. Recently, Pusey, Barrett and Rudolph (PBR) demonstrated that under an independence assumption, the quantum state is a representation of the physical state of a single quantum system [1]. This poses a further interesting question, namely whether ψ-ontology can be argued without resorting to nontrivial assumptions such as the in-dependence assumption (cf. Ref. [2-4]). In this Letter, we will show that protective measurements [5,6] already provide such an argument. The meaning of the quantum state is usually analyzed in the context of conventional impulsive measurements of an ensemble of identically prepared systems. However, it has been known that the quantum state of a single prepared system can be protectively measured [5-9]. During a protective measurement, the measured system is protected by an appropriate procedure (e.g. via the quantum Zeno effect) so that its quantum state neither changes nor becomes entangled with the quantum state of the measuring device appreciably. In this way, such protective measurements can measure the expectation values of observables from a single quantum system, even if the system is initially not in an eigenstate of the measured observable, and in particular, the quantum state of the system can also be measured as expectation values of certain observables. It is expected that protective measurements will be realized in the near future with the rapid development of quantum technologies.
This paper outlines a ‘paradox’ in quantum measurement theory, illustrated with two different types of systems. If this paradox cannot be resolved in ordinary quantum mechanics (as I currently think), it is alarming. If it can be resolved, it can be added to a long list of examples that show the internal consistency of quantum mechanics, and in this case I hope the correct analysis will be an interesting example for students. The immediate paradox involves a failure of Lorentz invariance for measurements on certain types of single particle systems. It seems to show that an absolute frame of reference is required to describe wave function collapse. But if the argument is correct, quantum measurement theory is not merely dependant on the frame of collapse - it is inconsistent, and experimental tests would have to be done to verify whether the apparent non-local effects predicted are real.
So far, the wave function has been interpreted as a probability amplitude, which is given physical meaning by ensemble averages of a large number of identical systems at a given time. We give an alternative interpretation of the wave function for a single system by means of a measurement which lasts a long time. This is a measurement on a single quantum system which determines the expectation values of (not necessarily commuting) observables while the wave function is protected from collapsing because it undergoes another suitably chosen interaction. This type of measurement enables the distinction between states which are not orthogonal, but are protected by a suitable interaction with the states of their environment, even for a single system. It therefore gives a different ontological meaning to the wave function. Several experiments in which such a measurement is realized, which can in principle be performed using electrons, neutrons, or atoms, are studied.
In classical mechanics, as we know, all observables commute with each other and therefore belong to the same “commuting set.” This means that – in principle – we can measure all observables simultaneously. Then, the state manifests itself as a collection of properties (of values of observables) (see Sec. 1.1), and as such it is observable. On the other hand, quantum-mechanical observables may not commute (see Subsec. 2.1.5). As a consequence, the state is not just a collection of observable values (see also Sec. 2.3) so that we may ask ourselves whether it is observable or not, and therefore raise the following question: What is the nature of the wave function? Is it simply a mathematical tool, i.e. does it only represent the sum of all that we can know about a system? Or does it have an ontological status? Since the early days of quantum mechanics, this question has been very popular. As a first attempt, de Broglie tried to interpret the wave function as describing, in classical terms, a wave field that envelopes a classical particle (see also Subsec. 16.3.2). This theory should predict the existence of empty waves, but several experiments have shown negative results (see also the end of Sec. 9.6). More recently, many physicists have tried to propose some methods in order to measure the wave function. Here we shortly report on some of these proposals and discuss to what extent the quantum state can be measured.