Undergrad Collapse of the wave function under simultaneous measurement

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the implications of Bell's theorem regarding entangled particles and the nature of simultaneous measurements. It argues that achieving true simultaneity in measurements is conceptually problematic, as "at exactly the same moment" lacks an invariant meaning across different frames of reference. However, the results of experiments involving spacelike separated measurements remain consistent, demonstrating expected correlations regardless of the measurement order. This consistency aligns with theoretical predictions, reinforcing that the order of measurements does not influence outcomes. Understanding the relativity of simultaneity is crucial for interpreting these findings in quantum mechanics.
Philippe H
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Supposing it could be done to perform a perfectly simultaneous measurement on 2 entangled particles, what would be the predicted correlation ?
Considering Bell’s theorem and the expected correlations between entangled particles or photons.
In a measurement setup e.g. Like Alain Aspect‘s with 2 entangled photons.
If we could make a setup that guarantees that the measurement on both photons is done at exactly the same moment, what correlation should we expect from those measurements?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Philippe H said:
If we could make a setup that guarantees that the measurement on both photons is done at exactly the same moment

You can't, because "at exactly the same moment" has no invariant meaning.

Also, this doesn't matter, because the results of the experiment are independent of the order in which the measurements on the two photons are made.
 
Philippe H said:
If we could make a setup that guarantees that the measurement on both photons is done at exactly the same moment, what correlation should we expect from those measurements?
Every experiment in which the two measurements are spacelike separated (which is many of them) is a test of simultaneous measurement, as the measurements will be simultaneous in some inertial frame. (If you are not familiar with relativity of simultaneity and the notions of timelike and spacelike intervals you'll want to learn about these first - google for "spacetime interval" and "Einstein train simultaneity").

These experiments produce the expected correlations, which is completely unsurprising because the theory predicts that the order of the measrements does not matter.
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K