Born's probability in decoherence

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Born's rule in the context of quantum measurement and decoherence. Participants explore how Born's rule relates to the probabilities of outcomes in a measurement process involving a quantum system, an apparatus, and an observer. The conversation touches on theoretical implications and the role of error terms in the measurement process.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions where Born's rule is applied in the measurement process, specifically whether it is at the interaction between the system and apparatus or between the apparatus and observer.
  • Another participant suggests that in practice, applying Born's rule at either the apparatus or observer level yields similar results, and that error terms can often be negligible.
  • A different participant emphasizes that the inquiry is theoretical rather than practical, indicating a desire for a more rigorous discussion of the implications of Born's rule.
  • It is noted that the standard minimal form of quantum theory does not clarify whether Born's rule should be applied at the apparatus level or the observer level.
  • Concerns are raised about how Born's rule addresses error terms that arise in the measurement process, particularly those that do not correspond to the expected outcomes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the application of Born's rule and the significance of error terms in quantum measurements. There is no consensus on whether Born's rule should be applied at the apparatus or observer level, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the treatment of error terms.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the ambiguity in the application of Born's rule within quantum measurement theory and the potential impact of measurement errors, which are not quantitatively defined in the conversation.

Sr1
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
How does Born's probability enter the decoherence theory?
Suppose we have a quantum system ##S##, an apparatus ##A##, and an observer, say Alice, ##O##. WLOG let ##S## be a spin-##1/2##particle in a state ##0.6|\uparrow\rangle+0.8|\downarrow\rangle##. The apparatus measure it in the ##\sigma_z## basis. Then the observer sees the result.

According to the decoherence theory, what happens in this measurement process is:

$$

\begin{align}

&\quad \psi_{before}=(0.6|\uparrow\rangle+0.8|\downarrow\rangle)\otimes|A_{init}\rangle\otimes|O_{init}\rangle\\

&\overset{\text{S,A interaction}}{\to}

\big(0.6|\uparrow\rangle(|A_{pointer \uparrow}\rangle+\delta |A_{pointer \downarrow}\rangle)+0.8|\downarrow\rangle(|A_{pointer \downarrow}\rangle+\delta |A_{pointer \uparrow}\rangle)\big)\otimes|O_{init}\rangle \\

&\overset{\text{A,O interaction}}{\to}

\psi_{after}=0.6|\uparrow\rangle|A_{pointer \uparrow}\rangle|\text{Alice thinks she observes}\uparrow\rangle

\\ &\quad\qquad\qquad\qquad\quad

+0.8|\downarrow\rangle|A_{pointer \downarrow}\rangle|\text{Alice thinks she observes}\downarrow\rangle

\\

&\qquad\qquad

+\delta|\uparrow\rangle|A_{\uparrow}\rangle|O_\downarrow\rangle

+\delta|\uparrow\rangle|A_{\downarrow}\rangle|O_\downarrow\rangle

+\delta|\uparrow\rangle|A_{\downarrow}\rangle|O_\uparrow\rangle

+\cdots

+\delta|\uparrow\rangle|A_{\uparrow}\rangle|O_{neither \uparrow nor \downarrow }\rangle

+\cdots

\end{align}
$$
I have included error terms since decoherence takes nonzero time, and ##\delta## may differ at different places. If Alice tells Bob the result of the experiment, then Bob will be entangled with the state written above.

My first question: where does Born's rule play its role in claiming that ##Pr(O_\uparrow)=0.36## and ##Pr(O_\downarrow)=0.64##? In the first step S,A interaction, or in the second step A,O interaction? Suppose afterward Alice communicates with Bob, should we apply Born's rule in the third step Alice,Bob interaction?

My second question: Born's rule claims that if ##\psi_{after}=0.6|\uparrow\rangle|A_{\uparrow}\rangle|O_\uparrow\rangle

+0.8|\downarrow\rangle|A_{\downarrow}\rangle|O_\downarrow\rangle##, then ##Pr(O_\uparrow)=0.36## and ##Pr(O_\downarrow)=0.64## hold. However, in reality, there are error terms of forms ##|\uparrow\rangle|A_{\uparrow}\rangle|O_\downarrow\rangle##, or even ##|\uparrow\rangle|A_{\uparrow}\rangle|\text{Alice is neither }O_{\uparrow} \text{ nor } O_{\downarrow}\rangle##. How should Born's rule deal with those error terms?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In practice, there is no much difference between applying the Born rule at the apparatus level and at the (conscious) observer level. So you can choose either. If the error terms are sufficiently small, you don't need to worry about them too. Of course, there are always measurement errors, even in classical physics, but if you are not able to quantitatively compute them, you just accept that there are various uncontrollable measurement errors when you compare theory with experiments, and learn to live with them.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba and pines-demon
I'm actually asking about theory, not practice
 
Sr1 said:
I'm actually asking about theory, not practice
Well, the Born rule is a theory telling how to compute the probability in practice. :oldbiggrin:
More seriously, the quantum theory in its standard minimal form does not tell precisely whether the Born rule should be applied at the apparatus level or the observer level.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K