Clean up projective measurements section
This commit is contained in:
@@ -635,20 +635,6 @@ We will represent the state of a particle with wave function
|
||||
$\psi(x,t)$ using the vector $\ket{\psi}$
|
||||
\cite[Sec.~3.3]{griffiths_introduction_1995}.
|
||||
|
||||
% We can model a wave function $\psi(x,t)$ as a linear combination of different
|
||||
% \emph{basis functions} $e_n(x,t),~n\in \mathbb{N}$ as%
|
||||
% \begin{align*}
|
||||
% \psi(x,t) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} c_n \cdot e_n(x,t)
|
||||
% .%
|
||||
% \end{align*}
|
||||
% To express this relation using linear algebra, we represent
|
||||
% $\psi(x,t)$ and $e_n(x,t)$ as vectors $\ket{\psi}$ and $\ket{e_n}$.
|
||||
% We write%
|
||||
% \begin{align*}
|
||||
% \ket{\psi} = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} c_n \ket{e_n}
|
||||
% .%
|
||||
% \end{align*}
|
||||
|
||||
% Operators
|
||||
|
||||
Another important notion is that of an \emph{operator}, a transformation
|
||||
@@ -785,7 +771,7 @@ We can decompose an arbitrary state as $\ket{\psi} = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} c_n
|
||||
\ket{e_n}$, where $\lvert c_n \rvert ^2$ represents the probability
|
||||
of obtaining a certain measurement value.
|
||||
Note that when we speak of an \emph{observable}, we are usually
|
||||
refering to the corresponding operator $\hat{Q}$.
|
||||
refering to the operator $\hat{Q}$.
|
||||
|
||||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||
\subsection{Projective Measurements}
|
||||
@@ -793,24 +779,23 @@ refering to the corresponding operator $\hat{Q}$.
|
||||
|
||||
% Projective measurements
|
||||
|
||||
% TODO: Introduce concept of collapsing the wave function onto a basis state
|
||||
The measurements we considered in the previous section, for which
|
||||
\autoref{eq:gen_expr_Q_exp_lin} holds, belong to the category of
|
||||
\emph{projective measurements}.
|
||||
For these, certain restrictions such as repeatability apply: after
|
||||
measuring a quantum state and thus collapsing it onto one of the
|
||||
determinate states, futher measurements should yield the same value.
|
||||
For these, certain restrictions such as repeatability apply: the act
|
||||
of measuring a quantum state should \emph{collapse} it onto one of
|
||||
the determinate states.
|
||||
Further measurements should then yield the same value.
|
||||
More general methods of modelling measurements exist, e.g., describing
|
||||
destructive measurements, but they are not relevant to us here
|
||||
\cite[Box~2.5]{nielsen_quantum_2010}.
|
||||
destructive measurements \cite[Box~2.5]{nielsen_quantum_2010}, but
|
||||
they are not relevant to us here.
|
||||
|
||||
% Projection operators
|
||||
|
||||
% TODO: Fix notational issues related to e_n
|
||||
We can model the collapse of the original state onto one of the
|
||||
superimposed basis states as a \emph{projection}.
|
||||
To see this, we insert \autoref{eq:determinate_basis} into
|
||||
\autoref{eq:observable_eigenrelation}, obtaining%
|
||||
To see this, we use Equations \ref{eq:determinate_basis} and
|
||||
\ref{eq:observable_eigenrelation} to compute
|
||||
\begin{align*}
|
||||
\hat{Q}\ket{\psi} = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} c_n \hat{Q} \ket{e_n}
|
||||
= \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \lambda_n c_n \ket{e_n}
|
||||
@@ -823,7 +808,7 @@ the separate components as
|
||||
\begin{align*}
|
||||
\hat{Q} = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \lambda_n \hat{P}_n
|
||||
\end{align*}
|
||||
using \emph{projection operators}
|
||||
using \emph{projection operators} \cite[Eq.~3.160]{griffiths_introduction_1995}
|
||||
\begin{align*}
|
||||
\hat{P}_n := \ket{e_n}\bra{e_n}, \hspace{3mm} n\in \mathbb{N}
|
||||
.
|
||||
@@ -839,10 +824,12 @@ A particularly interesting property of projection operators is that
|
||||
= \hat{P}_n \ket{\psi},
|
||||
\end{align*}%
|
||||
and the only way this can hold for any $\ket{\psi}$ is if $\hat{P}_n$
|
||||
only has the eigenvalues $0$ or $1$.
|
||||
As explained in the previous section, the eigenvalues are the results
|
||||
of performing a measurement.
|
||||
We can thus use the projection operator as an observable and treat
|
||||
only has the eigenvalues $0$ or $1$
|
||||
% tex-fmt: off
|
||||
\cite[Prob.~3.57a)]{griffiths_introduction_1995}.
|
||||
% tex-fmt: on
|
||||
The eigenvalues can again be interpreted as possible measurement results.
|
||||
We can thus use the $\hat{P}$ as an observable and treat
|
||||
the eigenvalue as an indicator of the state having a component along
|
||||
the related basis vector.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user