How do i perform a measurement of a many body system?

spocchio
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
first of all, I'm a new bie of QM,

with q1,p1 and q2,p2 the couples of position and momentum
THE QUESTION IS: can I just measure a \hat{q1} with no measure of \hat{q2}? and how? and how I calculate the new wave function with the dependece of q2?

I hope that \hat{q1}|q1,q2>=q1|q1,q2> is true
if so when i have a certain state |\phi>
and I measure q1 i'll obtain a new state like |phi>=|q1,q2> with a probability of
|<q1,q2|\phi>|^2
but wath q2 have I to choose?
but, does it have sense? the q2 dependece vanish!? where I'm wrong?

it could seems a bit confusing, sure as i am.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You're touching on what is called symmetrization of the wave function. The probability distribution associated with the many-body state is given by |u(x1,x2)|^2 whe u is the many body wave function. We require that this be the same upon exchange of particle label, because we cannot in principle label quantum mechanical particles. That means |u(x1, x2)|^2 = |u(x2,x1)|^2. So it doesn't matter which position operator you use, they're all equivalent. The condition of the wave function itself is not unique mathematically. I.E. we could have u(x1,x2) differ from u(x2,x1) by some complex phase. However, in 3-dimensions symmetries of space-time require that u(x1,x2)=u(x2,x1) or u(x1,x2) = -u(x2,x1) (Ihave neglected the spin symmetries associated with the state. The former is true for bosons and the latter for fermions.
 
Oh, you are just making things more complicated...
as I know these problems of symmetries are forced in QM, they don't came from any
principal postulate.
I don't want to deal about these symmetries problems.
I think this problem of many bodies is mathematically equivalent to a problem of 1 body in N dimensions..
for example q1=x,q2=y for a free particle in 2D

so, the new version of the problem is:
for a particle in N Dimension, how do I perform a measurement in only one coordinate?
for example, with a slit.
 
That's incorrect. For a general system the wavefunction is a nonseperable scalar function of 3N arguments and contains all of the relevant information about the state of the system given the Hilbert space.
 
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
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...
Back
Top