We exhibit three inequalities involving quantum measurement, all of which are sharp and state independent. The first inequality bounds the performance of joint measurement. The second quantifies the trade-off between the measurement quality and the disturbance caused on the measured system. Finally, the third inequality provides a sharp lower bound on the amount of decoherence in terms of the measurement quality. This gives a unified description of both the Heisenberg principle and the collapse of the wave function.We exhibit three inequalities involving quantum measurement, all of which are sharp and state independent. The first inequality bounds the performance of joint measurement. The second quantifies the trade-off between the measurement quality and the disturbance caused on the measured system. Finally, the third inequality provides a sharp lower bound on the amount of decoherence in terms of the measurement quality. This gives a unified description of both the Heisenberg principle and the collapse of the wave function.

Jun 10, 20068 citations

Quantum Measurement, a coherent description

Bas Janssens

It is widely known that `collapse of the wave function' on a quantum system A may be brought about by an interaction with another quantum system B. We will prove that this is not just a possible, but a necessary consequence of information transfer from A to B. We generalize this in order to explain why coherences are normally not observed in macroscopic quantum systems. Finally, we provide a quantitative insight into the balance between information gain and state disturbance. We define the quality of an information transfer. For all information transfers of a certain quality, we find a minimum amount of state collapse. Along the way, we obtain generalizations of the Joint Measurement Theorem and of the Heisenberg Principle.It is widely known that `collapse of the wave function' on a quantum system A may be brought about by an interaction with another quantum system B. We will prove that this is not just a possible, but a necessary consequence of information transfer from A to B. We generalize this in order to explain why coherences are normally not observed in macroscopic quantum systems. Finally, we provide a quantitative insight into the balance between information gain and state disturbance. We define the quality of an information transfer. For all information transfers of a certain quality, we find a minimum amount of state collapse. Along the way, we obtain generalizations of the Joint Measurement Theorem and of the Heisenberg Principle.

arXiv:quant-ph/0503009Mar 1, 20053 citations

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle

Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is usually taken to express a limitation of operational possibilities imposed by quantum mechanics.Here we demonstrate that the full content of this principle also includes its positive role as a condition ensuring that mutually exclusive experimental options can be reconciled if an appropriate trade-off is accepted.The uncertainty principle is shown to appear in three manifestations, in the form of uncertainty relations: for the widths of the position and momentum distributions in any quantum state; for the inaccuracies of any joint measurement of these quantities; and for the inaccuracy of a measurement of one of the quantities and the ensuing disturbance in the distribution of the other quantity.Whilst conceptually distinct, these three kinds of uncertainty relations are shown to be closely related formally.Finally, we survey models and experimental implementations of joint measurements of position and momentum and comment briefly on the status of experimental tests of the uncertainty principle.Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is usually taken to express a limitation of operational possibilities imposed by quantum mechanics.Here we demonstrate that the full content of this principle also includes its positive role as a condition ensuring that mutually exclusive experimental options can be reconciled if an appropriate trade-off is accepted.The uncertainty principle is shown to appear in three manifestations, in the form of uncertainty relations: for the widths of the position and momentum distributions in any quantum state; for the inaccuracies of any joint measurement of these quantities; and for the inaccuracy of a measurement of one of the quantities and the ensuing disturbance in the distribution of the other quantity.Whilst conceptually distinct, these three kinds of uncertainty relations are shown to be closely related formally.Finally, we survey models and experimental implementations of joint measurements of position and momentum and comment briefly on the status of experimental tests of the uncertainty principle.

WORLD SCIENTIFIC eBooksMay 1, 20000 citations

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle: Three Faces, Two Roles

Paul Busch, Teiko Heinonen, PEKKA J. LAHTI

A review is given of precise formulations of three conceptually distinct but related manifestations of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. This principle appears in the form of trade-off inequalities: for the widths of the position and momentum distributions in any quantum state; for the inaccuracies of any joint measurement of these quantities; and for the inaccuracy of a measurement of one of the quantities and the ensuing disturbance in the distribution of the other quantity. The uncertainty principle is often described as expressing a limitation of operational possibilities imposed by quantum mechanics. Here we demonstrate that apart from this negative role, the full content of the uncertainty principle also includes its positive role as a condition ensuring that mutually exclusive experimental options can indeed be reconciled if an appropriate trade-off is accepted. Finally, we survey models and experimental implementations of joint measurements of position and momentum and comment briefly on the status of experimental tests of the uncertainty principle.A review is given of precise formulations of three conceptually distinct but related manifestations of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. This principle appears in the form of trade-off inequalities: for the widths of the position and momentum distributions in any quantum state; for the inaccuracies of any joint measurement of these quantities; and for the inaccuracy of a measurement of one of the quantities and the ensuing disturbance in the distribution of the other quantity. The uncertainty principle is often described as expressing a limitation of operational possibilities imposed by quantum mechanics. Here we demonstrate that apart from this negative role, the full content of the uncertainty principle also includes its positive role as a condition ensuring that mutually exclusive experimental options can indeed be reconciled if an appropriate trade-off is accepted. Finally, we survey models and experimental implementations of joint measurements of position and momentum and comment briefly on the status of experimental tests of the uncertainty principle.

Sep 25, 20063 citations

Heisenberg uncertainty for qubit measurements

Paul Busch, PEKKA J. LAHTI, Reinhard F. Werner

Reports on experiments recently performed in Vienna [Erhard et al., Nature Phys. 8, 185 (2012)] and Toronto [Rozema et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 100404 (2012)] include claims of a violation of Heisenberg's error-disturbance relation. In contrast, we have presented and proven a Heisenberg-type relation for joint measurements of position and momentum [Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 160405 (2013)]. To resolve the apparent conflict, we formulate here a general trade-off relation for errors in qubit measurements, using the same concepts as we did in the position-momentum case. We show that the combined errors in an approximate joint measurement of a pair of $\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}1$-valued observables $A,B$ are tightly bounded from below by a quantity that measures the degree of incompatibility of $A$ and $B$ . The claim of a violation of Heisenberg is shown to fail because it is based on unsuitable measures of error and disturbance. Finally we show how the experiments mentioned may directly be used to test our error inequality.Reports on experiments recently performed in Vienna [Erhard et al., Nature Phys. 8, 185 (2012)] and Toronto [Rozema et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 100404 (2012)] include claims of a violation of Heisenberg's error-disturbance relation. In contrast, we have presented and proven a Heisenberg-type relation for joint measurements of position and momentum [Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 160405 (2013)]. To resolve the apparent conflict, we formulate here a general trade-off relation for errors in qubit measurements, using the same concepts as we did in the position-momentum case. We show that the combined errors in an approximate joint measurement of a pair of $\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}1$-valued observables $A,B$ are tightly bounded from below by a quantity that measures the degree of incompatibility of $A$ and $B$. The claim of a violation of Heisenberg is shown to fail because it is based on unsuitable measures of error and disturbance. Finally we show how the experiments mentioned may directly be used to test our error inequality.

arXiv:1311.0837Physical Review AJan 31, 2014119 citations

Error-tradeoff and error-disturbance relations for incompatible quantum measurements

Cyril Branciard

Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is one of the main tenets of quantum theory. Nevertheless, and despite its fundamental importance for our understanding of quantum foundations, there has been some confusion in its interpretation: Although Heisenberg's first argument was that the measurement of one observable on a quantum state necessarily disturbs another incompatible observable, standard uncertainty relations typically bound the indeterminacy of the outcomes when either one or the other observable is measured. In this paper, we quantify precisely Heisenberg's intuition. Even if two incompatible observables cannot be measured together, one can still approximate their joint measurement, at the price of introducing some errors with respect to the ideal measurement of each of them. We present a tight relation characterizing the optimal tradeoff between the error on one observable vs. the error on the other. As a particular case, our approach allows us to characterize the disturbance of an observable induced by the approximate measurement of another one; we also derive a stronger error-disturbance relation for this scenario.Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is one of the main tenets of quantum theory. Nevertheless, and despite its fundamental importance for our understanding of quantum foundations, there has been some confusion in its interpretation: Although Heisenberg's first argument was that the measurement of one observable on a quantum state necessarily disturbs another incompatible observable, standard uncertainty relations typically bound the indeterminacy of the outcomes when either one or the other observable is measured. In this paper, we quantify precisely Heisenberg's intuition. Even if two incompatible observables cannot be measured together, one can still approximate their joint measurement, at the price of introducing some errors with respect to the ideal measurement of each of them. We present a tight relation characterizing the optimal tradeoff between the error on one observable vs. the error on the other. As a particular case, our approach allows us to characterize the disturbance of an observable induced by the approximate measurement of another one; we also derive a stronger error-disturbance relation for this scenario.

arXiv:1304.2071Proceedings of the National Academy of SciencesApr 5, 2013144 citations

A,B

are tightly bounded from below by a quantity that measures the degree of incompatibility of

A

and

B

. The claim of a violation of Heisenberg is shown to fail because it is based on unsuitable measures of error and disturbance. Finally we show how the experiments mentioned may directly be used to test our error inequality.