I Experimental realizatoin of sequential Stern-Gerlach's

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter nicholas_eng
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Experimental
nicholas_eng
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
TL;DR Summary
Looking for articles of experimental realizations of sequential Stern-Gerlach experiments
So, an usual introduction to Quantum Mechanics (like the one given by Sakurai) is to refer to sequential Stern-Gerlach (SG) experiments. For example, a first one aligned to the z axis, a second one aligned to the x axis, and a third one aligned to the z axis again (with no relevant dynamical evolution happening in between). The fact that the first and third SG's may give different results leads us to believe in all the quantum weirdness encapsulated by the non-commutation relations for those observables.

There are some details about such experiment that I'm curious to understand a little better. In particular, the way the SG experiment works, is that it deflects into different directions particles with different values for the corresponding spin component. So if I want to plug one of the outgoing beams into a new SG, I should position this second SG in a position where it intercepts that beam, right?. I can't just "realign" the beam (e.g. by using E.M. field to compensate the deflection) because that would violate the "no dynamic evolution" principle, such E.M. field would have a non-trivial effect on the spin state anyway. Is this assessment correct, and is that something taken into consideration in actual realizations of this experiment?

I would love if someone could point me articles like that, as I'm sure there must be many.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
nicholas_eng said:
Summary:: Looking for articles of experimental realizations of sequential Stern-Gerlach experiments
I assumed that the sequential SG is a thought experiment and practically almost impossible.
 
There are some experiments with polarized neutrons, e.g.,

J.E. Sherwood et al, Stern-Gerlach Experiment on Polarized Neutrons, Phys. Rev. 96, 1546 (1954)
https://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.96.1546

T. J. L. Jones, W. G. Williams, A Stern-Gerlach polarimeter for cold neutrons, J. Phys. E 13, 227 (1980)
https://doi.org/10.1088/0022-3735/13/2/025

O. Zimmer, J. Felber and O. Schärpf, Stern-Gerlach effect without magnetic-field gradient, EPL 53 183
https://doi.org/10.1209/epl/i2001-00134-y
 
  • Like
Likes nicholas_eng and PeroK
nicholas_eng said:
if I want to plug one of the outgoing beams into a new SG, I should position this second SG in a position where it intercepts that beam, right?. I can't just "realign" the beam (e.g. by using E.M. field to compensate the deflection) because that would violate the "no dynamic evolution" principle, such E.M. field would have a non-trivial effect on the spin state anyway. Is this assessment correct

Basically, yes. Your assessment also illustrates why most experiments involving spin and entanglement are done with photons instead of electrons. :wink: The nice thing about photons is that you can "realign" beams of them with simple mirrors, without violating the "no dynamic evolution" principle. That makes it much easier to implement multiple interactions in series on photon beams.
 
Of course the action of a mirror on a photon is through interactions between charges making up the mirror and the photon (em. field). The point is, it's described by a unitary evolution (making the mirror of high quality, i.e., with very little absorption), changing the polarization of the photon in a well-determined way. In other words it's easy to manipulate photons in controlled ways using usual optical elements (mirrors, beam splitters, polarizers) without causing (too much) "decoherence".
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top