Recent content by jeeves

I've done some more reading and I think the majority of what has been said in this thread so far is not totally correct (including the analysis I gave a few pages ago). I believe a correct analysis of a decaying atom with a continuous photodetector is given in "Quantum Zeno effect with general...

You may find Section X of the following paper useful: https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0611067 The authors say that measuring the EM field is only a "weak measurement" of the state of the atom, so it won't lead to quantum Zeno. I guess this is essentially the "you're measuring the decay product...

Here is a link to the second reference: https://web.archive.org/web/20100331045832/http://www.phytem.ens-cachan.fr/telechargement/Optique_Quantique/Raizen_decay.pdf The Greenland article is a short expository article, and I would not expect it to be highly cited. Note that the Khalfin paper...

There must be. An exact exponential decay law at all times is inconsistent with the laws of quantum mechanics. Refer to: Greenland, P. T. Seeking non-exponential decay. Nature 335, 298 (1988). Further, there is indeed a program of theoretical predictions and attempted experimental tests of...

Yes, the exponential distribution is memoryless and cannot produce a Zeno effect. The effect relies on the deviations from exponential decay at short times. Quoting Wikipedia: References are available in the article, and the calculation is done in equations (11) through (15) of the...

Great, thank you. This completely answers my original question. I will look into the Bell inequality violations; thank you for that also. My only remaining worry is about that comment of Peres. As far as I can tell, he seems to be arguing that: The Geiger counter does not probe the energy...

I am merely repeating the analysis in post #12 of this thread. Do you disagree with that analysis? The preceding calculations do not seem to have a direct bearing on this particular example. The only relevant comment is:

I found the following quote in the paper He writes of quantum Zeno and continuous measurements that: This explanation is consistent with Nugatory's (and others) given earlier. What does the parenthetical "it interacts with decay products whose Hamiltonian has a continuous spectrum"...

Yes, I would like to write things in terms of a wave function with coefficients ##A(t)## and ##B(t)##. In particular, I would like to know whether what I wrote in post #59 is correct (regarding both the coefficients themselves and the reasoning used to reach them). I disagree that if I am not...

Sure. As I said in post #64, I just want to know how to apply the math appropriately to correctly predict the empirically observed outcomes. We make predictions in QM by constructing a wave function and reading off the desired probabilities. I am asking only how to construct the wave function...

Sure, we can gloss "What is the state?" as asking about statistics of identical ensembles. And my question "Why is the state that way?" can be glossed as "How does one derive the empirically observed statistics a priori by reasoning about Schrödinger evolution and entanglement?" . The key point...

I object to this characterization. I do not believe I am asking anything about interpretation. I am simply asking: What is the state of the atom at various times? This is a question with empirically testable consequences. In principle, the atom could be measured, and its state determined...

Thank you, vanhees. Based on your answer, I have the following understanding. Is it correct? Suppose we have a Schrödinger's cat setup in a transparent box. I use ##A(t)## as the coefficient of the "undecayed" atom state, and ##B(t)## as the coefficient of the "decayed" atom state. At ##t=0##...

This seems reasonable, but I'm still a bit confused. Suppose I try to apply this formalism to a classic quantum Zeno experiment, where the atom is repeatedly measured at small time intervals in a way that reduces or eliminates the possibility of decay. How does the time-dependent undecayed state...

I believe that makes sense. Let me see if I understand. Suppose again we are in the short-time regime where the decay is not memoryless, and I observe after some time has passed that the cat has not died (atom has not decayed). Then do you agree that I have learned something nontrivial about...