Is a Complex Probability Result Valid in a Quantum Measurement?

Bacat
Messages
149
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Consider a quantum system described by a basis \mid 1 \rangle and \mid 2 \rangle.

The system is initially in the state: \psi_i = \frac{i}{\sqrt3} \mid 1 \rangle + \sqrt{\frac{2}{3}} \mid 2 \rangle.

(a) Find the probability that the initial system is measured to be in the state: \psi_f = \frac{1 + i}{\sqrt 3} \mid 1 \rangle + \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}} \mid 2 \rangle

Homework Equations



The basis is assumed to be orthonormal, hence \langle 1 \mid 1 \rangle = \langle 2 \mid 2 \rangle = 1

Probability is calculated as (\langle \psi_f \mid \psi_i \rangle)^2

The Attempt at a Solution



Calculating this, I get a complex answer. I'm not sure but I think a probability (a real observable) should be a real number. Is that right?

The answer I get is \frac{2 + 2\sqrt{2}}{9}(1+i).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I just tried to normalize the two states and found that they are both unit-normal already...

This is confusing.
 
Bacat said:
Probability is calculated as (\langle \psi_f \mid \psi_i \rangle)^2

Surely you mean:

\frac{\langle \psi_i \vert \psi_f \rangle \langle \psi_f \vert \psi_i \rangle}{\langle \psi_i \vert \psi_i \rangle \langle \psi_f \vert \psi_f \rangle}=\vert\langle \psi_i \vert \psi_f \rangle \vert^2

(for normalized \psi_i and \psi_f)...right?:wink:
 
Thanks for the response ggh.

Since my states are normalized, the denominator drops to 1. The numerator seems correct. I think you are right that I missed the absolute value signs.

...

After a quick calculation, I see that's where I screwed up. I get a real answer if I take the absolute value before squaring.

Thanks!
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top