Is there a law which prohibits measuring En of a non-stationary state

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter cooev769
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Law Measuring State
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the measurement of energy in non-stationary states within quantum mechanics, specifically questioning whether there are mathematical rules that prevent measuring energies that are not eigenvalues of the system. Participants explore the implications of the Born rule and the nature of energy measurements in quantum systems.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about why energy measurements in non-stationary states cannot yield values between discrete energy eigenstates, questioning if there is a mathematical prohibition against this.
  • Another participant cites the Born rule as a fundamental postulate of quantum mechanics, stating that measurements will yield one of the energy eigenstates.
  • A later reply suggests that the discrete nature of energy measurements is an experimental fact, emphasizing that quantum theories must reproduce these discrete measurements.
  • Further elaboration indicates that the Born rule is part of the basic postulates of quantum mechanics and references the need for an axiomatic treatment to fully understand these concepts.
  • One participant notes the apparent contradiction between the expectation of measuring energy using the energy operator and the actual measurement outcomes in quantum mechanics.
  • Another participant explains that boundary conditions imposed when solving the Schrödinger equation restrict the energy spectrum to discrete values for certain systems, such as bound states.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of energy measurements in quantum mechanics, with some agreeing on the role of the Born rule while others question the implications and underlying mathematics. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specifics of measuring energies between eigenstates.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on the definitions of stationary and non-stationary states, as well as the assumptions made regarding boundary conditions in quantum systems. The discussion does not resolve the mathematical intricacies involved in these measurements.

cooev769
Messages
114
Reaction score
0
Hey.

Trying to wrap my head around this maths. And given that the wave function is a superposition of a bunch of stationary states, each with a different coefficient. The coefficients squared added add to one. And the probability of finding the particle in a given state is cn^2. I know all of this and I know that if you observe the particle you will find it in one of the stationary states. But is there anything in the maths which ensures you cannot measure the En to be say the E=E1+E2, why can't you measure energies in between, is there any mathematical rule which prohibits this. This still just rattles my brain.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The law you're looking for is known as the Born rule. It's not mathematical, it is one of the fundamental postulates of quantum mechanics - you will only get one of the energy eigenstates when you measure energy.
 
Okay so it's just been observed and become a postulate of quantum mechanics?
 
Yup. It's an experimental fact that bound states have discrete energies, and a quantum theory needs to reproduce the discrete measurements as well as the probability distribution for the spectrum for a given state.
 
Just to elaborate further its in the basic postulates of QM.

To fully understand it you need to see a proper axiomatic treatment.

I STRONGLY recommend getting a hold of Ballentine - Quantum mechanics - A Modern Development:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/9810241054/?tag=pfamazon01-20

Read the first 3 chapters and all will be clear - QM is basically the working out of just two axioms - the second one being the Born Rule mentioned previously in this thread.

That text is mathematically advanced, but don't worry about that, just skip the derivations that are a bit hairy and you will get the gist.

Interestingly Born's rule is not entirely independent of the first axiom being to some extent implied from the first via Gleason's Theorem.

QM from just one axiom. Obviously not - but that it can be reduced to reasonable assumptions is very interesting - the key one of which is non contextuality - but that is just by the by.

Thanks
Bill
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah that is rather baffling. It would make sense to think that applying the energy operator which gives you the expected energy would be what is measured. Is there a reason for this, or is that just one of the mysteries of QM
 
cooev769 said:
But is there anything in the maths which ensures you cannot measure the En to be say the E=E1+E2, why can't you measure energies in between, is there any mathematical rule which prohibits this.

When one solves the Schrödinger equation for the energy spectrum of a given system one must impose boundary conditions on the solutions to the Schrödinger equation-it is these boundary conditions that restrict the energy spectrum to discrete values for bound systems like an infinite potential box or the hydrogen atom.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K