Pure and not pure states, an example

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jonas_nilsson
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Example Pure States
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concepts of pure and mixed states in quantum mechanics, particularly in the context of a two-particle system. Participants explore the implications of measurement on the state of a particle and how it affects the density operator, addressing both theoretical and conceptual aspects.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a pure state for a two-particle system and questions whether a measurement on one particle can lead to a mixed state, expressing uncertainty about the implications of the measurement.
  • Another participant contrasts two scenarios regarding measurement: one where the outcome is known and one where it is not, suggesting that the second scenario results in a mixed state.
  • A participant confirms the understanding of mixed states arising from measurements and describes the collapse of the wave function into specific states based on measurement outcomes.
  • There is a query about the form of the density matrix for one particle after tracing out the other, with a suggestion that it involves inner products of states.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the notation and the nature of the density matrix, distinguishing between "improper" and "proper" density matrices based on whether a measurement has been performed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the distinction between pure and mixed states and the effects of measurement on these states. However, there is ongoing exploration and some uncertainty regarding the implications of specific measurements and the resulting forms of the density matrix.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the correctness of their interpretations and calculations, particularly regarding the density operator and the implications of measurement outcomes. The discussion includes various assumptions about normalization and the nature of the states involved.

jonas_nilsson
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Hi there,

I was looking at a problem, where the state (a pure state) of a two-particle system was given as:

[tex]| \Psi> = A_{11}| a_1 b_1 > + A_{12} | a_1 b_2> + A_{21} | a_2 b_1> + A_{22} | a_2 b_2>[/tex]

In the system particle a can only be in the states a_1 or a_2 and particle b in b_1 or b_2.

The density operator should be
[tex]\rho = |\Psi><\Psi|[/tex]

The question is, what happens if we make a measurement that determines the state of particle a? Will the collapsed state still be pure, or can it somehow fall into a mixed state? The second alternative sounds unintiutive to me, but I have been surprised many times enough...

Assuming that the measurement yielded the result a_1, then I think the density operator should collaps into
[tex]\rho_1' = p_1 ~\rho ~p_1[/tex]
where p_1 the projection operator
[tex]p_1 = |a_1><a_1|[/tex]
is. After making sure that the norm is OK, I then find that
[tex]Trace(\rho_1^2) = 1[/tex],
which means that the state after the measurement is still pure. Is this correct? I don't feel confident with this, and I sense that I might be missing something.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For simplicity, consider a 1-particle system in the state

|phi> = c1|a1> + c2|a2>,

with |phi>, |a1>, and |c1> normalized. The density, as you say is,

rho = |phi><phi|.

Now perform a measurement.

It seems to me that there is a difference between the following 2 situations:

1) a measurement is known to be made, and the outcome is known;

2) a measurement is known to be made, and the outcome is unknown.

You have considered case 1), i.e., suppose the result of the measurement is known to be a1. Then the nortmailzed state now is

|phi'> = |a1>

= (p1 |phi>)/|p1 |phi>|,

where p1 = |a1><a1|.

The new density matrix is

rho' = |phi'><phi'|

= (p1 rho p1)/|p1 |phi>|^2

Now, case 2). With the probability |c1|^2, the state of the system is |a1>. With probability |c2|^2, the state of the system is |a2>. Thus, this is a mixed state with density matrix

rho'' = |c1|^2 |a1><a1| + |c2|^2 |a2><a2|.

I am not completely sure about this.

Regards,
George
 
Aaaah, thanks George, now I sort of get the question I was trying to answer. Didn't make any sense to put question of type 1 in a test (which I am looking at).

For case 2 I certainly get a mixed state. I did this approach:
In case we measure a_1 the wave function collapses into:
[tex]|\Psi_1> = c_1 ~(A_{11} |a_1~b_1> + A_{12} |a_1~b_2>)[/tex]
(c for proper norm) with probability
[tex]p_{a1} = A_{11}^2 + A_{12}^2[/tex]
and the analog for measurement yielding a_2:
[tex]| \Psi_2> = c_2 ~(A_{21} |a_2~b_1> + A_{22} |a_2~b_2>)[/tex]
(c for proper norm) with probability
[tex]p_{a1} = A_{21}^2 + A_{12}^2[/tex]

But how about this question: What does the density matrix in the state space for a look like?
Would it simply be
[tex]\rho_a = |a_1>a_{11}<a_1| ~+~ |a_1>a_{12}<a_2| ~+~ |a_2>a_{21}<a_1| ~+~|a_2>a_{22}<a_2|[/tex]
where [tex]a_{11} = <\Psi | a_1><a_1| \Psi>[/tex] (and so on) ?
 
jonas_nilsson said:
But how about this question: What does the density matrix in the state space for a look like?
Would it simply be
[tex]\rho_a = |a_1>a_{11}<a_1| ~+~ |a_1>a_{12}<a_2| ~+~ |a_2>a_{21}<a_1| ~+~|a_2>a_{22}<a_2|[/tex]
where [tex]a_{11} = <\Psi | a_1><a_1| \Psi>[/tex] (and so on) ?

Yes, I think so. A little care is needed with the notation, though. For example, [tex]<a_1| \Psi>[/tex] is not a scalar, it is ket in the state space for the second particle. Consequently, [tex]<\Psi | a_1>[/tex] is a bra for the second particle, and [tex]<\Psi | a_1><a_1| \Psi>[/tex], as the inner product of a bra and a ket, is a scalar.

[tex]\rho_a[/tex] is what results when the the [tex]b[/tex] states are "traced out".

Regards,
George
 
George Jones said:
[tex]\rho_a[/tex] is what results when the the [tex]b[/tex] states are "traced out".

Regards,
George

Yes, that's correct. In fact, the local density matrix [tex]\rho_a[/tex] is always the initial (pure state) density matrix [tex]\rho[/tex] with b traced out, whether or not a measurement on b is performed. But if no measurement is performed, it is called an "improper" density matrix, while if a measurement is performed (Born rule and projection), it is a "proper" density matrix.
All observables only related to a have expectation value [tex]Tr(\rho_a A)[/tex].
So for an observable only related to a, the expectation value is independent of whether, or what, measurement has been performed on b.

cheers,
Patrick.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K