Heisenberg Uncertainty Relation for mixed states

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the Heisenberg uncertainty relation for mixed states, specifically how to derive it from the established relation for pure states. Participants explore the implications of adding statistical uncertainty to quantum uncertainty and the methods of proof involved.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asks how to prove the Heisenberg uncertainty relation for mixed states using the proof for pure states as a basis.
  • Another participant argues that adding statistical uncertainty cannot reduce the uncertainty in observables, suggesting it can only increase.
  • A participant provides a detailed mathematical proof for the uncertainty relation applicable to any state, outlining the steps involving self-adjoint operators and variances.
  • Some participants express confusion about deriving the uncertainty relation specifically from the pure state assumption without repeating the entire proof process.
  • One participant humorously notes that if a second proof is desired, effort must be shown, implying that the first proof suffices.
  • A later reply suggests that for pure states, the proof is similar, with the simplification of setting one probability to 1 and others to 0.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on how to derive the uncertainty relation for mixed states from pure states. There are competing views on the implications of adding statistical uncertainty and the necessity of repeating proof steps.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the clarity of the proof process and the assumptions involved in transitioning from pure to mixed states.

Jamister
Messages
58
Reaction score
4
TL;DR
proving the Heisenberg uncertainty relations for mixed states
How do you prove Heisenberg uncertainty relations for mixed states (density matrix), only from knowing the relation is true for pure states?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can prove it for any state. Let ##\hat{A}## and ##\hat{B}## be the self-adjoint operators representing observables and assume for simplicity that ##\langle A \rangle=\langle B \rangle=0##, where ##\langle \hat{A} \rangle=\mathrm{Tr}(\hat \rho \hat{A})##. Since ##\hat{\rho}## is a positive semi-definite self-adjoint operator there's a complete orthonormalized eigenbasis ##|u_n \rangle##, i.e.,
$$\hat{\rho}=\sum_n p_n |u_n \rangle \langle u_n |.$$
Thus any expectation value reads
$$\langle A \rangle = \mathrm{Tr} (\hat{\rho} \hat{A}) = \sum_{n} \langle u_n| \rho_n \hat{A} |u_n \rangle = \sum_n P_n \langle u_n |\hat{A}| u_n \rangle.$$
Now apply this to the self-adjoint operator
$$\hat{C}=(\hat{A}-\mathrm{i} \lambda \hat{B})(\hat{A}+\mathrm{i} \lambda \hat{B}), \quad \lambda \in \mathbb{R}.$$
First of all
$$\langle u_n|\hat{C}| u_n \rangle=\langle (\hat{A}+\mathrm{i} \lambda \hat{B}) u_n|(\hat{A}+\mathrm{i} \lambda \hat{B}) u_n \rangle \geq 0.$$
And since ##P_n \geq 0## for all ##n## you also have
$$P(\lambda)=\langle (\hat{A}-\mathrm{i} \lambda \hat{B})(\hat{A}+\mathrm{i} \lambda \hat{B}) \rangle \geq 0.$$
Multiplying this out gives
$$P(\lambda) = \langle A^2 \rangle + \langle \mathrm{i} [\hat{A},\hat{B}] \rangle \lambda + \lambda^2 \langle \hat{B}^2 \rangle.$$
Now ##\langle A^2 \rangle=\Delta A^2## and ##\langle B^2 \rangle=\Delta B^2## are the variances of ##A## and ##B## (because we assumed ##\langle A \rangle=\langle B \rangle=0##), i.e.,
$$P(\lambda)=\lambda^2 \Delta B^2 + \lambda \langle \mathrm{i} [\hat{A},\hat{B}]\rangle + \Delta A^2 \geq 0$$
für ##\lambda \geq 0##. Now ##P(\lambda)## is a real quadratic polynomial and thus its discriminant fulfills,
$$\frac{1}{4} \langle \mathrm{i} [\hat{A},\hat{B}] \rangle^2 - \Delta A^2 \Delta B^2 \leq 0,$$
and from this finally
$$\Delta A \Delta B \geq \frac{1}{2} |\langle \mathrm{i} [\hat{A},\hat{B}] \rangle|,$$
which is the Heisenberg-Robertson uncertainty relation.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: DrChinese, hilbert2 and PeroK
vanhees71 said:
You can prove it for any state. Let ##\hat{A}## and ##\hat{B}## be the self-adjoint operators representing observables and assume for simplicity that ##\langle A \rangle=\langle B \rangle=0##, where ##\langle \hat{A} \rangle=\mathrm{Tr}(\hat \rho \hat{A})##. Since ##\hat{\rho}## is a positive semi-definite self-adjoint operator there's a complete orthonormalized eigenbasis ##|u_n \rangle##, i.e.,
$$\hat{\rho}=\sum_n p_n |u_n \rangle \langle u_n |.$$
Thus any expectation value reads
$$\langle A \rangle = \mathrm{Tr} (\hat{\rho} \hat{A}) = \sum_{n} \langle u_n| \rho_n \hat{A} |u_n \rangle = \sum_n P_n \langle u_n |\hat{A}| u_n \rangle.$$
Now apply this to the self-adjoint operator
$$\hat{C}=(\hat{A}-\mathrm{i} \lambda \hat{B})(\hat{A}+\mathrm{i} \lambda \hat{B}), \quad \lambda \in \mathbb{R}.$$
First of all
$$\langle u_n|\hat{C}| u_n \rangle=\langle (\hat{A}+\mathrm{i} \lambda \hat{B}) u_n|(\hat{A}+\mathrm{i} \lambda \hat{B}) u_n \rangle \geq 0.$$
And since ##P_n \geq 0## for all ##n## you also have
$$P(\lambda)=\langle (\hat{A}-\mathrm{i} \lambda \hat{B})(\hat{A}+\mathrm{i} \lambda \hat{B}) \rangle \geq 0.$$
Multiplying this out gives
$$P(\lambda) = \langle A^2 \rangle + \langle \mathrm{i} [\hat{A},\hat{B}] \rangle \lambda + \lambda^2 \langle \hat{B}^2 \rangle.$$
Now ##\langle A^2 \rangle=\Delta A^2## and ##\langle B^2 \rangle=\Delta B^2## are the variances of ##A## and ##B## (because we assumed ##\langle A \rangle=\langle B \rangle=0##), i.e.,
$$P(\lambda)=\lambda^2 \Delta B^2 + \lambda \langle \mathrm{i} [\hat{A},\hat{B}]\rangle + \Delta A^2 \geq 0$$
für ##\lambda \geq 0##. Now ##P(\lambda)## is a real quadratic polynomial and thus its discriminant fulfills,
$$\frac{1}{4} \langle \mathrm{i} [\hat{A},\hat{B}] \rangle^2 - \Delta A^2 \Delta B^2 \leq 0,$$
and from this finally
$$\Delta A \Delta B \geq \frac{1}{2} |\langle \mathrm{i} [\hat{A},\hat{B}] \rangle|,$$
which is the Heisenberg-Robertson uncertainty relation.
but you proved it from the beginning. how do you prove it by using the assumption from pure states, and not repeating the all process again
 
  • Sad
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
hilbert2 said:
I wouldn't expect the uncertainty in any observable to get smaller by adding statistical uncertainty to the already existing quantum uncertainty in the position and momentum. It can only increase.

There's something said about this on page 16 here: https://www.univie.ac.at/nuhag-php/dateien/talks/1073_NuHAG_WPI_2008.pdf
I don't think it's obvious
 
Jamister said:
but you proved it from the beginning. how do you prove it by using the assumption from pure states, and not repeating the all process again
You only get one proof for free! If you want another one, you have to show some effort yourself.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71, Vanadium 50, hutchphd and 3 others
Jamister said:
but you proved it from the beginning. how do you prove it by using the assumption from pure states, and not repeating the all process again
For pure states the proof is almost the same. You just set one of the ##p_n=1## and all others to 0.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
638
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K